On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 11:48:46AM -0700, Siwei Liu wrote: > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 8:31 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 10:13:37AM -0500, Venu Busireddy wrote: > >> On 2018-09-18 09:35:48 -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >> > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 12:20:52PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote: > >> > > On Wed, 12 Sep 2018 11:22:12 -0400 > >> > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 08:17:45AM -0700, Samudrala, Sridhar wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On 9/7/2018 2:34 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >> > > > > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 11:49:15AM -0700, Sridhar Samudrala > >> > > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > VIRTIO_NET_F_STANDBY feature enables hypervisor to indicate > >> > > > > > > virtio_net > >> > > > > > > device to act as a standby for another device with the same > >> > > > > > > MAC address. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sridhar Samudrala <sridhar.samudr...@intel.com> > >> > > > > > > Acked-by: Cornelia Huck <coh...@redhat.com> > >> > > > > > > Fixes: https://github.com/oasis-tcs/virtio-spec/issues/18 > >> > > > > > Applied but when do you plan to add documentation as pointed > >> > > > > > out by Jan and Halil? > >> > > > > > >> > > > > I thought additional documentation will be done as part of the > >> > > > > Qemu enablement > >> > > > > patches and i hope someone in RH is looking into it. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Does it make sense to add a link to to the kernel documentation of > >> > > > > this feature in > >> > > > > the spec > >> > > > > > >> > > > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/networking/net_failover.html > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > I do not think this will address the comments posted. Specifically > >> > > > we > >> > > > should probably include documentation for what is a standby and > >> > > > primary: > >> > > > what is expected of driver (maintain configuration on standby, > >> > > > support > >> > > > primary coming and going, transmit on standby only if there is no > >> > > > primary) and of device (have same mac for standby as for standby). > >> > > > >> > > Yes, we need some definitive statements of what a driver and a device > >> > > is supposed to do in order to conform; it might make sense to discuss > >> > > this in conjunction with discussion on any QEMU patches (have not > >> > > checked whether anything has been posted, just returned from vacation). > >> > > > >> > > I assume that we still stick with the plan to implement/document > >> > > MAC-based handling first and then enhance with other methods later? > >> > > >> > I'm fine with that at least. If someone wants to work on > >> > other methods straight away, that's also fine by me. > >> > >> Patch set [1] implements the failover-group-id mechanism. Are you > >> thinking of some other method? > >> > >> Venu > >> > >> [1] https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/virtio-dev/201806/msg00384.html > >> > > > > Yes, the grouping mechanism seems fine to me (I don't remember > > about the implementation, it's been a while). > > > > It is not by itself sufficient though, is it? > > I do understand that the group ID patch is incomplete though it's a > base patch for the real work. > > > > > MAC is assumed to be shared to avoid things like ARP/neighboor > > rediscovery, right? > > True, but does this really need to be part of the guest-host > interface? Or rather, I don't see how MAC based matching can be done > on the host part.
mac address matching does not need to affect host side. > Are you going to expose MAC address to VFIO? If mac of a VF is programmed by libvirt through the PF (that's already the case), VFIO does not need to care about it. > > The thing is the current MAC based implementation has intrinsic flaw > that doesn't propagate errors to hypervisor, or there's no back > channel for guest to unwind the hot plug action upon failure in > probing or enslaving the primary. I guess you can eject the primary if you like. But why does hypervisor need to know? On error, just don't use primary, use standby. > If you think about a more robust > implementation, another grouping mechanism rather than MAC is pretty > much required. > > Thanks, > -Siwei I don't really know what is the flaw, or how is it fixed by a grouping mechanism. All this motivation was never described as part of work on an alternate grouping. > > If true that implies that to avoid guest confusion visibility of the > > primary needs to be controlled by standby's driver. > > This makes this patchset incomplete. > > > > For this work to be complete what is needed is: > > - hypervisor: add control of primary's visibility to guest > > - guest: add support for this grouping to the failover driver > > > > We also need > > - spec: document matching rules based on the pci bridge > > > > and it's helpful to have a spec proposal with implementation, but I > > would say at least proposed patches to one of the above 2 would be > > helpful before we include this in spec. > > > > -- > > MST > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscr...@lists.oasis-open.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-h...@lists.oasis-open.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscr...@lists.oasis-open.org For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-h...@lists.oasis-open.org