Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 12 Dec 2022 14:10:08 +0100 | From | Stefano Garzarella <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/1] virtio/vsock: Make vsock virtio packet buff size configurable |
| |
On Fri, Dec 09, 2022 at 07:48:02PM +0000, Carlos Llamas wrote: >On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 02:55:19PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote: >> > >> > +uint virtio_transport_max_vsock_pkt_buf_size = 1024 * 64; >> > +module_param(virtio_transport_max_vsock_pkt_buf_size, uint, 0444); >> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(virtio_transport_max_vsock_pkt_buf_size); >> > + > >I'm interested on this functionality, so I could take this on.
Great! We are changing the packet handling using sk_buff [1], so I think it's better to rebase on that work that should be merged in net-next after the current merge window will close.
> >> >> Maybe better to add an entry under sysfs similar to what Jiang proposed >> here: >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/virtualization/2021-June/054769.html > >Having a look at Jiang's RFC patch it seems the proposed sysfs node >hangs off from the main kernel object e.g. /sys/kernel. So I wonder if >there is a more appropriate parent for this knob?
Agree, what about /sys/devices ? I would take a closer look at what is recommend in this case.
> >Also, I noticed that Ram's patch here is using read-only permissions for >the module parameter and switching to sysfs would mean opening this knob >up to be dynamically configured? I'd need to be careful here. >
True, but even if it's changed while we're running, I don't think it's a big problem.
Maybe the problem here would be the allocation of RX buffers made during the probe. Could this be a good reason to use a module parameter?
Thanks, Stefano
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20221202173520.10428-1-bobby.eshleman@bytedance.com/
| |