On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 08:15:04PM +0200, Paraschiv, Andra-Irina wrote:
On 01/12/2020 18:09, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 05:25:03PM +0200, Andra Paraschiv wrote:
vsock enables communication between virtual machines and the host they
are running on. With the multi transport support (guest->host and
host->guest), nested VMs can also use vsock channels for communication.
In addition to this, by default, all the vsock packets are forwarded to
the host, if no host->guest transport is loaded. This behavior can be
implicitly used for enabling vsock communication between sibling VMs.
Add a flag field in the vsock address data structure that can be used to
explicitly mark the vsock connection as being targeted for a certain
type of communication. This way, can distinguish between nested VMs and
sibling VMs use cases and can also setup them at the same time. Till
now, could either have nested VMs or sibling VMs at a time using the
vsock communication stack.
Use the already available "svm_reserved1" field and mark it as a flag
field instead. This flag can be set when initializing the vsock address
variable used for the connect() call.
Maybe we can split this patch in 2 patches, one to rename the svm_flag
and one to add the new flags.
Sure, I can split this in 2 patches, to have a bit more separation of
duties.
Signed-off-by: Andra Paraschiv <andra...@amazon.com>
---
include/uapi/linux/vm_sockets.h | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/vm_sockets.h
b/include/uapi/linux/vm_sockets.h
index fd0ed7221645d..58da5a91413ac 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/vm_sockets.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/vm_sockets.h
@@ -114,6 +114,22 @@
#define VMADDR_CID_HOST 2
+/* This sockaddr_vm flag value covers the current default use case:
+ * local vsock communication between guest and host and nested
VMs setup.
+ * In addition to this, implicitly, the vsock packets are
forwarded to the host
+ * if no host->guest vsock transport is set.
+ */
+#define VMADDR_FLAG_DEFAULT_COMMUNICATION 0x0000
I think we don't need this macro, since the next one can be used to
check if it a sibling communication (flag 0x1 set) or not (flag 0x1
not set).
Right, that's not particularly the use of the flag value, as by
default comes as 0. It was more for sharing the cases this covers. But
I can remove the define and keep this kind of info, with regard to the
default case, in the commit message / comments.
Agree, you can add few lines in the comment block of VMADDR_FLAG_SIBLING
describing the default case when it is not set.
+
+/* Set this flag value in the sockaddr_vm corresponding field if
the vsock
+ * channel needs to be setup between two sibling VMs running on
the same host.
+ * This way can explicitly distinguish between vsock channels
created for nested
+ * VMs (or local communication between guest and host) and the
ones created for
+ * sibling VMs. And vsock channels for multiple use cases (nested
/ sibling VMs)
+ * can be setup at the same time.
+ */
+#define VMADDR_FLAG_SIBLING_VMS_COMMUNICATION 0x0001
What do you think if we shorten in VMADDR_FLAG_SIBLING?
Yup, this seems ok as well for me. I'll update the naming.
Thanks,
Stefano
