Messages in this thread | | | From | "Wang, Wei W" <> | Subject | RE: [RFC] hypercall-vsock: add a new vsock transport | Date | Thu, 11 Nov 2021 08:02:27 +0000 |
| |
> From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com> On Wednesday, November 10, 2021 5:35 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > AF_VSOCK is designed to allow multiple transports, so why not. There is a cost > to developing and maintaining a vsock transport though.
Yes. The effort could be reduced via simplifying the design as much as possible: e.g. no ring operations - guest just sends a packet each time for the host to read. (this transport isn't targeting for high performance)
> > I think Amazon Nitro enclaves use virtio-vsock and I've CCed Andra in case she > has thoughts on the pros/cons and how to minimize the trusted computing > base.
Thanks for adding more related person to the discussion loop.
> > If simplicity is the top priority then VIRTIO's MMIO transport without indirect > descriptors and using the packed virtqueue layout reduces the size of the > implementation: > https://docs.oasis-open.org/virtio/virtio/v1.1/cs01/virtio-v1.1-cs01.html#x1-1 > 440002
I listed some considerations for virtio-mmio in the response to Michael. Please have a check if any different thoughts.
Thanks, Wei
| |