Re: [Xen-devel] Is fallback vhost_net to qemu for live migrate availableï

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 09:40:48AM +0100, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 09:28:11AM +0800, Qin Chuanyu wrote:
> > On 2013/9/2 15:57, Wei Liu wrote:
> > >On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 12:45:11PM +0800, Qin Chuanyu wrote:
> > >>On 2013/8/30 0:08, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> > >>>Hi Qin,
> > >>
> > >>>>By change the memory copy and notify mechanism ïcurrently virtio-net 
> > >>>>with
> > >>>>vhost_net could run on Xen with good performanceã
> > >>>
> > >>>I think the key in doing this would be to implement a property
> > >>>ioeventfd and irqfd interface in the driver domain kernel.  Just
> > >>>hacking vhost_net with Xen specific knowledge would be pretty nasty
> > >>>IMHO.
> > >>>
> > >>Yes, I add a kernel module which persist virtio-net pio_addr and
> > >>msix address as what kvm module did. Guest wake up vhost thread by
> > >>adding a hook func in evtchn_interrupt.
> > >>
> > >>>Did you modify the front end driver to do grant table mapping or is
> > >>>this all being done by mapping the domain's memory?
> > >>>
> > >>There is nothing changed in front end driver. Currently I use
> > >>alloc_vm_area to get address spaceï and map the domain's memory as
> > >>what what qemu did.
> > >>
> > >
> > >You mean you're using xc_map_foreign_range and friends in the backend to
> > >map guest memory? That's not very desirable as it violates Xen's
> > >security model. It would not be too hard to pass grant references
> > >instead of guest physical memory address IMHO.
> > >
> > In fact, I did what virtio-net have done in Qemu. I think security
> > is a pseudo question because Dom0 is under control.
> > 
> 
> Consider that you might have driver domains. Not every domain is under
> control or trusted.

I don't see anything that will prevent using driver domains here.

> Also consider that security model like XSM can be
> used to audit operations to enhance security so your foreign mapping
> approach might not always work.

It could be nice to have as an option, sure.
XSM is disabled by default though so I don't think lack of support for
that makes it a prototype.

> In short term foreign mapping can save you some time implementing the
> prototype.
> In long term using grant table is the proper way to go. And
> IMHO the benifit outweights the cost.
> 
> Wei.

I'm guessing direct access could be quite a bit faster.
But someone would have to implement your idea in order to
do a cost/benefit analysis.

> > Host could access memory of guest in KVM much easier than Xen,
> > but I hadn't heard someone said KVM is un-secret.
> > 
> > Regards
> > Qin chuanyu
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel