search for: vmci_host_do_init_context

...> > > > +int vmci_host_users(void) > > > +{ > > > + return atomic_read(&vmci_host_active_users); > > > +} > > > + > > > /* > > > * Called on open of /dev/vmci. > > > */ > > > @@ -338,6 +343,8 @@ static int vmci_host_do_init_context(struct > > > vmci_host_dev *vmci_host_dev, > > > vmci_host_dev->ct_type = VMCIOBJ_CONTEXT; > > > atomic_inc(&vmci_host_active_users); > > > > > > + vmci_call_vsock_callback(true); > > > + > > > > Since we don't unregis...

...t_code_active(void) > atomic_read(&vmci_host_active_users) > 0); > } > > +int vmci_host_users(void) > +{ > + return atomic_read(&vmci_host_active_users); > +} > + > /* > * Called on open of /dev/vmci. > */ > @@ -338,6 +343,8 @@ static int vmci_host_do_init_context(struct > vmci_host_dev *vmci_host_dev, > vmci_host_dev->ct_type = VMCIOBJ_CONTEXT; > atomic_inc(&vmci_host_active_users); > > + vmci_call_vsock_callback(true); > + Since we don't unregister the transport if user count drops back to 0, we could just call this the f...

...t_code_active(void) > atomic_read(&vmci_host_active_users) > 0); > } > > +int vmci_host_users(void) > +{ > + return atomic_read(&vmci_host_active_users); > +} > + > /* > * Called on open of /dev/vmci. > */ > @@ -338,6 +343,8 @@ static int vmci_host_do_init_context(struct > vmci_host_dev *vmci_host_dev, > vmci_host_dev->ct_type = VMCIOBJ_CONTEXT; > atomic_inc(&vmci_host_active_users); > > + vmci_call_vsock_callback(true); > + Since we don't unregister the transport if user count drops back to 0, we could just call this the f...

On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 01:27:01PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > VMCI transport provides both g2h and h2g behaviors in a single > transport. > We are able to set (or not) the g2h behavior, detecting if we > are in a VMware guest (or not), but the h2g feature is always set. > This prevents to load other h2g transports while we are in a > VMware guest. In the vhost_vsock.ko

...ost_active_users) > 0); > > } > > > > +int vmci_host_users(void) > > +{ > > + return atomic_read(&vmci_host_active_users); > > +} > > + > > /* > > * Called on open of /dev/vmci. > > */ > > @@ -338,6 +343,8 @@ static int vmci_host_do_init_context(struct > > vmci_host_dev *vmci_host_dev, > > vmci_host_dev->ct_type = VMCIOBJ_CONTEXT; > > atomic_inc(&vmci_host_active_users); > > > > + vmci_call_vsock_callback(true); > > + > > Since we don't unregister the transport if user count drops...

On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 01:27:00PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > RFC: > - I'd like to move MODULE_ALIAS_NETPROTO(PF_VSOCK) to af_vsock.c. > @Jorgen could this break the VMware products? What will cause the vmw_vsock_vmci_transport.ko module to be loaded after you remove MODULE_ALIAS_NETPROTO(PF_VSOCK)? Perhaps drivers/misc/vmw_vmci/vmci_guest.c:vmci_guest_probe_device() could

...isc/vmw_vmci/vmci_host.c @@ -108,6 +108,11 @@ bool vmci_host_code_active(void) atomic_read(&vmci_host_active_users) > 0); } +int vmci_host_users(void) +{ + return atomic_read(&vmci_host_active_users); +} + /* * Called on open of /dev/vmci. */ @@ -338,6 +343,8 @@ static int vmci_host_do_init_context(struct vmci_host_dev *vmci_host_dev, vmci_host_dev->ct_type = VMCIOBJ_CONTEXT; atomic_inc(&vmci_host_active_users); + vmci_call_vsock_callback(true); + retval = 0; out: diff --git a/include/linux/vmw_vmci_api.h b/include/linux/vmw_vmci_api.h index acd9fafe4fc6..f28907345c80 100644...

This series adds the multi-transports support to vsock, following this proposal: https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg575792.html With the multi-transports support, we can use VSOCK with nested VMs (using also different hypervisors) loading both guest->host and host->guest transports at the same time. Before this series, vmci-transport supported this behavior but only using VMware

This series adds the multi-transports support to vsock, following this proposal: https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg575792.html With the multi-transports support, we can use VSOCK with nested VMs (using also different hypervisors) loading both guest->host and host->guest transports at the same time. Before this series, vmci-transport supported this behavior but only using VMware

Most of the patches are reviewed by Dexuan, Stefan, and Jorgen. The following patches need reviews: - [11/15] vsock: add multi-transports support - [12/15] vsock/vmci: register vmci_transport only when VMCI guest/host are active - [15/15] vhost/vsock: refuse CID assigned to the guest->host transport RFC: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/cover/1168442/ v1:

* * * This series of VMCI linux upstreaming patches include latest udpate from VMware. -split guest, host and core driver code into different files -use EXPORT_SYMBOLS_GPL -remove vmci_device_get and vmci_device_release APIs -simplify the event deliver mechanism -driver ioctl code cleanup -sparse clean * * * In an effort to improve the out-of-the-box experience with

* * * This series of VMCI linux upstreaming patches include latest udpate from VMware. -split guest, host and core driver code into different files -use EXPORT_SYMBOLS_GPL -remove vmci_device_get and vmci_device_release APIs -simplify the event deliver mechanism -driver ioctl code cleanup -sparse clean * * * In an effort to improve the out-of-the-box experience with

* * * This series of VMCI linux upstreaming patches include latest udpate from VMware to address Greg's and all other's code review comments. Summary of changes: - Rebase our linux kernel tree from v3.5 to v3.7. - Fix all checkpatch warnings and errors. Fix some checkpatch with -strict errors. This addresses Greg's comment: On 15 Nov 2012

* * * This series of VMCI linux upstreaming patches include latest udpate from VMware to address Greg's and all other's code review comments. Summary of changes: - Rebase our linux kernel tree from v3.5 to v3.7. - Fix all checkpatch warnings and errors. Fix some checkpatch with -strict errors. This addresses Greg's comment: On 15 Nov 2012