[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [virtio-comment] Re: About custom device counter
On Mon, 19 Jun 2023 10:25:38 -0400, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 02:23:31PM +0800, Xuan Zhuo wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 05:02:01 -0400, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 07:27:15PM +0800, Xuan Zhuo wrote: > > > > On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 02:25:42 -0400, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 02:12:35PM +0800, Xuan Zhuo wrote: > > > > > > We hope to support device custom counter. That is, virtio spec provides a > > > > > > channel for driver and device, and both key and value are provided by device. > > > > > > > > > > > > We discussed this issue earlier, and after some internal practice, I think it is > > > > > > still necessary to discuss this again. > > > > > > > > > > > > It is very important, each cloud vendor will always have some special counters, > > > > > > these counters may not exist in another vendor. At the same time, if we have > > > > > > to discuss it in the spec every time we add a counter, or add a feature, I > > > > > > think it is very inconvenient. Manufacturers may add some new counters at any > > > > > > time based on some new requirements. Some counters may also be removed at any > > > > > > time. > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course I know that doing this might hurt migration. But what I want to say is, > > > > > > why does it affect live migration? These counters we plan to give to users > > > > > > through ethtool -S, and some changes have taken place in the ethtool counters > > > > > > output by users. Does this have any practical impact? Or do we directly use > > > > > > some other output in a way, we can clearly tell the user that these counters > > > > > > may change during the migration process. For example, the driver is migrated > > > > > > to some new devices. These devices support some new counters. I think users > > > > > > should be able to see these new counters. These new counters may be the > > > > > > purpose of the migration. > > > > > > > > > > > > We don't need to support live migration at this point. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why not just document the thing? > > > > > > > > Device Counter or Device Stat, we discussed this issue earlier, > > > > So I want to slove the problem migration firstly. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > Sorry have trouble parsing this. > > > > > > Can we get examples of counters from various vendors, so that > > > it's clear what kind of thing this, and it becomes convincing > > > that abstracting this in virtio spec is pointless? > > > > Such as "limit", in a cloud scenario, multiple users purchase different VMs, and > > these VMs share the capabilities of the same host. In order to ensure that each > > VM will not affect others, the network card(virtio-net) capability of each VM is > > limited. When these users purchase VMs, this limit has already been determined. > > So if the network card traffic of a vm exceeds the upper limit, packet loss will > > occur. It is necessary for us to count these packet losses. And the device > > should expose to the user. > > > > > > Such as "session", our dpu supports tcp connection tracking, but there is an > > upper limit to the number of connections, and if it exceeds, packet loss will > > also occur. > > > > These are two commonly used scenarios, I hope they can help you. > > > > Thanks. > > > So not a counter at all really. More a capability. Explain in other mail. > > My rule of thumb is that if something can be relevant to multiple > vendors then it should not be a vendor specific capaiblity. > What you have described can easily apply to a software > virtio imlementation, so it's relevant for multiple > vendors. Great!! > > So please try to add this to the spec as a generic capability. > Yes adding vendor specific extensions is of course less work > for vendors. But the ecosystem is only strong if everyone is > working on the same spec and codebase. I agree. Thank. > > > > > > > > > Also, am I right assuming that in virtualized settings this is mostly > > > relevant for hosts? E.g. guests see a vendor neutral virtio but > > > host wants to figure out source of issues? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > MST > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This publicly archived list offers a means to provide input to the > > > > > OASIS Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) TC. > > > > > > > > > > In order to verify user consent to the Feedback License terms and > > > > > to minimize spam in the list archive, subscription is required > > > > > before posting. > > > > > > > > > > Subscribe: virtio-comment-subscribe@lists.oasis-open.org > > > > > Unsubscribe: virtio-comment-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org > > > > > List help: virtio-comment-help@lists.oasis-open.org > > > > > List archive: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/virtio-comment/ > > > > > Feedback License: https://www.oasis-open.org/who/ipr/feedback_license.pdf > > > > > List Guidelines: https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/mailing-lists > > > > > Committee: https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/virtio/ > > > > > Join OASIS: https://www.oasis-open.org/join/ > > > > > > > > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]