search for: pmd_memnic

...virtual machines. >> Ivshmem is nice and simple but does not seem to be used anymore. >> And it >> does not define higher level devices, like a console. > > FYI, ivhsmem is used here: > http://dpdk.org/browse/memnic/tree/ > > http://dpdk.org/browse/memnic/tree/pmd/pmd_memnic.c#n449 > > There are some few other references too, if needed. It may be used, but that doesn't mean it's maintained, or robust against abuse. My advice is to steer clear of it.

...virtual machines. >> Ivshmem is nice and simple but does not seem to be used anymore. >> And it >> does not define higher level devices, like a console. > > FYI, ivhsmem is used here: > http://dpdk.org/browse/memnic/tree/ > > http://dpdk.org/browse/memnic/tree/pmd/pmd_memnic.c#n449 > > There are some few other references too, if needed. It may be used, but that doesn't mean it's maintained, or robust against abuse. My advice is to steer clear of it.

Hi, i am working on the jailhouse[1] project and am currently looking at inter-VM communication. We want to connect guests directly with virtual consoles based on shared memory. The code complexity in the hypervisor should be minimal, it should just make the shared memory discoverable and provide a signaling mechanism. We would like to reuse virtio so that Linux-guests will eventually just work

Hi, i am working on the jailhouse[1] project and am currently looking at inter-VM communication. We want to connect guests directly with virtual consoles based on shared memory. The code complexity in the hypervisor should be minimal, it should just make the shared memory discoverable and provide a signaling mechanism. We would like to reuse virtio so that Linux-guests will eventually just work

...releases, that was never documented) > > ivhsmem does not require hugetlbfs. It is optional. > >> * it doesn't require the kernel driver from the DPDK sample > > ivhsmem does not require DPDK kernel driver. see memnic's PMD: > http://dpdk.org/browse/memnic/tree/pmd/pmd_memnic.c You're right, I was confusing memnic and the vhost example in DPDK. Paolo

...releases, that was never documented) > > ivhsmem does not require hugetlbfs. It is optional. > >> * it doesn't require the kernel driver from the DPDK sample > > ivhsmem does not require DPDK kernel driver. see memnic's PMD: > http://dpdk.org/browse/memnic/tree/pmd/pmd_memnic.c You're right, I was confusing memnic and the vhost example in DPDK. Paolo

...ay we can share memory between virtual machines. > Ivshmem is nice and simple but does not seem to be used anymore. > And it > does not define higher level devices, like a console. FYI, ivhsmem is used here: http://dpdk.org/browse/memnic/tree/ http://dpdk.org/browse/memnic/tree/pmd/pmd_memnic.c#n449 There are some few other references too, if needed. Best regards, Vincent

...is nice and simple but does not seem to be used anymore. > >> And it > >> does not define higher level devices, like a console. > > > > FYI, ivhsmem is used here: > > http://dpdk.org/browse/memnic/tree/ > > > > http://dpdk.org/browse/memnic/tree/pmd/pmd_memnic.c#n449 > > > > There are some few other references too, if needed. > > It may be used, but that doesn't mean it's maintained, or robust > against abuse. My advice is to steer clear of it. Could you elaborate on why you advice against it? Henning

...t then we'll have a security issue to be managed by Qemu for vhost and ivshmem. I'll be pleased to contribute on it for ivshmem thru another thread that this one. >> ivhsmem does not require DPDK kernel driver. see memnic's PMD: >> http://dpdk.org/browse/memnic/tree/pmd/pmd_memnic.c > > You're right, I was confusing memnic and the vhost example in DPDK. Definitively, it proves a lack of documentation. You welcome. Olivier did explain it: >> ivhsmem does not require hugetlbfs. It is optional. >> >> > * it doesn't require ivshmem (it does...

Some dropped quoted text restored. Vincent JARDIN <vincent.jardin at 6wind.com> writes: > Markus, > > see inline (I am not on all mailing list, please, keep the cc list). > >> Sure! The reasons for my dislike range from practical to >> philosophical. >> >> My practical concerns include: >> >> 1. ivshmem code needs work, but has no maintainer

Some dropped quoted text restored. Vincent JARDIN <vincent.jardin at 6wind.com> writes: > Markus, > > see inline (I am not on all mailing list, please, keep the cc list). > >> Sure! The reasons for my dislike range from practical to >> philosophical. >> >> My practical concerns include: >> >> 1. ivshmem code needs work, but has no maintainer

...be added to 2.1) somehow I agree: we need both models: vhost-user and ivshmem because of the previous (A) comments. > * it doesn't require the kernel driver from the DPDK sample ivhsmem does not require DPDK kernel driver. see memnic's PMD: http://dpdk.org/browse/memnic/tree/pmd/pmd_memnic.c > * it is not just shared memory, but also defines an interface to use > it (another of Markus's points) agreed Paolo: but you short narrow it for networking use cases only. Shared memory ? la ivshmem provides other features (see (A) again). > > vhost-user is superior, and...

Il 13/06/2014 15:41, Vincent JARDIN ha scritto: >> Fine, however Red Hat would also need a way to test ivshmem code, with >> proper quality assurance (that also benefits upstream, of course). With >> ivshmem this is not possible without the out-of-tree packages. > > You did not reply to my question: how to get the list of things that > are/will be disabled by Redhat? I

Il 13/06/2014 15:41, Vincent JARDIN ha scritto: >> Fine, however Red Hat would also need a way to test ivshmem code, with >> proper quality assurance (that also benefits upstream, of course). With >> ivshmem this is not possible without the out-of-tree packages. > > You did not reply to my question: how to get the list of things that > are/will be disabled by Redhat? I

...not seem to be used anymore. >> >> And it >> >> does not define higher level devices, like a console. >> > >> > FYI, ivhsmem is used here: >> > http://dpdk.org/browse/memnic/tree/ >> > >> > http://dpdk.org/browse/memnic/tree/pmd/pmd_memnic.c#n449 >> > >> > There are some few other references too, if needed. >> >> It may be used, but that doesn't mean it's maintained, or robust >> against abuse. My advice is to steer clear of it. > > Could you elaborate on why you advice against it?...

...not seem to be used anymore. >> >> And it >> >> does not define higher level devices, like a console. >> > >> > FYI, ivhsmem is used here: >> > http://dpdk.org/browse/memnic/tree/ >> > >> > http://dpdk.org/browse/memnic/tree/pmd/pmd_memnic.c#n449 >> > >> > There are some few other references too, if needed. >> >> It may be used, but that doesn't mean it's maintained, or robust >> against abuse. My advice is to steer clear of it. > > Could you elaborate on why you advice against it?...