OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

virtio-dev message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [virtio-dev] Re: net_failover slave udev renaming (was Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v6 4/4] netvsc: refactor notifier/event handling code to use the bypass framework)

On 2/25/2019 6:05 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 05:39:12PM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
Moreover, you were suggesting hiding the lower slave devices anyway. There was some discussion
about moving them to a hidden network namespace so that they are not visible from the default namespace.
I looked into this sometime back, but did not find the right kernel api to create a network namespace within
kernel. If so, we could use this mechanism to simulate a 1-netdev model.
Yes, that's one possible implementation (IMHO the key is to make 1-netdev
model as much transparent to a real NIC as possible, while a hidden netns is
just the vehicle). However, I recall there was resistance around this
discussion that even the concept of hiding itself is a taboo for Linux
netdev. I would like to summon potential alternatives before concluding
1-netdev is the only solution too soon.

Your scripts would not work at all then, right?
At this point we don't claim images with such usage as SR-IOV live
migrate-able. We would flag it as live migrate-able until this ethtool
config issue is fully addressed and a transparent live migration
solution emerges in upstream eventually.
The hyper-v netvsc with 1-dev model uses a timeout to allow  udev to do its rename.
I proposed a patch to key state change off of the udev rename, but that patch was
Of course that would mean nothing works without udev - was
that the objection? Could you help me find that discussion pls?
Yeah, the kernel should work with and without udev rename - typically the kernel is agnostic of upcoming rename. User may opt out for kernel provided names (particularly on older distros) then no rename would ever happen.

I ever thought about this approach but didn't think it would fit. But, what is the historical reason that prevents slave from being renamed after being opened? Could we specialize a code path for this kernel created device, as net_failover shouldn't carry over any history burden?


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]