search for: vsock_device

...return __vsock_core_init(t, THIS_MODULE); +} void vsock_core_exit(void); /**** UTILS ****/ diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c index 5adfd94..5743553 100644 --- a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c @@ -1925,9 +1925,22 @@ static struct miscdevice vsock_device = { .fops = &vsock_device_ops, }; -static int __vsock_core_init(void) +int __vsock_core_init(const struct vsock_transport *t, struct module *owner) { - int err; + int err = mutex_lock_interruptible(&vsock_register_mutex); + if (err) + return err; + + if (transport) { + err = -EBUSY...

...return __vsock_core_init(t, THIS_MODULE); +} void vsock_core_exit(void); /**** UTILS ****/ diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c index 5adfd94..5743553 100644 --- a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c @@ -1925,9 +1925,22 @@ static struct miscdevice vsock_device = { .fops = &vsock_device_ops, }; -static int __vsock_core_init(void) +int __vsock_core_init(const struct vsock_transport *t, struct module *owner) { - int err; + int err = mutex_lock_interruptible(&vsock_register_mutex); + if (err) + return err; + + if (transport) { + err = -EBUSY...

...return __vsock_core_init(t, THIS_MODULE); +} void vsock_core_exit(void); /**** UTILS ****/ diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c index 5adfd94..85d232b 100644 --- a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c @@ -1925,9 +1925,23 @@ static struct miscdevice vsock_device = { .fops = &vsock_device_ops, }; -static int __vsock_core_init(void) +int __vsock_core_init(const struct vsock_transport *t, struct module *owner) { - int err; + int err = mutex_lock_interruptible(&vsock_register_mutex); + + if (err) + return err; + + if (transport) { + err = -EBU...

...return __vsock_core_init(t, THIS_MODULE); +} void vsock_core_exit(void); /**** UTILS ****/ diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c index 5adfd94..85d232b 100644 --- a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c @@ -1925,9 +1925,23 @@ static struct miscdevice vsock_device = { .fops = &vsock_device_ops, }; -static int __vsock_core_init(void) +int __vsock_core_init(const struct vsock_transport *t, struct module *owner) { - int err; + int err = mutex_lock_interruptible(&vsock_register_mutex); + + if (err) + return err; + + if (transport) { + err = -EBU...

...(transport) { + if (transport_single) { err = -EBUSY; goto err_busy; } @@ -1920,7 +1940,7 @@ int __vsock_core_init(const struct vsock_transport *t, struct module *owner) * unload while there are open sockets. */ vsock_proto.owner = owner; - transport = t; + transport_single = t; vsock_device.minor = MISC_DYNAMIC_MINOR; err = misc_register(&vsock_device); @@ -1950,7 +1970,7 @@ int __vsock_core_init(const struct vsock_transport *t, struct module *owner) err_deregister_misc: misc_deregister(&vsock_device); err_reset_transport: - transport = NULL; + transport_single = NULL;...

...(transport) { + if (transport_single) { err = -EBUSY; goto err_busy; } @@ -1928,7 +1948,7 @@ int __vsock_core_init(const struct vsock_transport *t, struct module *owner) * unload while there are open sockets. */ vsock_proto.owner = owner; - transport = t; + transport_single = t; vsock_device.minor = MISC_DYNAMIC_MINOR; err = misc_register(&vsock_device); @@ -1958,7 +1978,7 @@ int __vsock_core_init(const struct vsock_transport *t, struct module *owner) err_deregister_misc: misc_deregister(&vsock_device); err_reset_transport: - transport = NULL; + transport_single = NULL;...

...well-know host CID (VMADDR_CID_HOST). + */ + if (transport_g2h) + cid = transport_g2h->get_local_cid(); + else if (transport_h2g) + cid = transport_h2g->get_local_cid(); + + if (put_user(cid, p) != 0) retval = -EFAULT; break; @@ -1970,24 +2056,13 @@ static struct miscdevice vsock_device = { .fops = &vsock_device_ops, }; -int __vsock_core_init(const struct vsock_transport *t, struct module *owner) +static int __init vsock_init(void) { - int err = mutex_lock_interruptible(&vsock_register_mutex); + int err = 0; - if (err) - return err; - - if (transport_single) { -...

...well-know host CID (VMADDR_CID_HOST). + */ + if (transport_g2h) + cid = transport_g2h->get_local_cid(); + else if (transport_h2g) + cid = transport_h2g->get_local_cid(); + + if (put_user(cid, p) != 0) retval = -EFAULT; break; @@ -1956,24 +2038,13 @@ static struct miscdevice vsock_device = { .fops = &vsock_device_ops, }; -int __vsock_core_init(const struct vsock_transport *t, struct module *owner) +static int __init vsock_init(void) { - int err = mutex_lock_interruptible(&vsock_register_mutex); + int err = 0; - if (err) - return err; - - if (transport_single) { -...

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:

Hi all, 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

Hi all, 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

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

From: Andy King <acking at vmware.com> ** Introduce VM Sockets *** In an effort to improve the out-of-the-box experience with Linux kernels for VMware users, VMware is working on readying the VM Sockets (VSOCK, formerly VMCI Sockets) (vmw_vsock) kernel module for inclusion in the Linux kernel. The purpose of this post is to acquire feedback on the vmw_vsock kernel module. Unlike previous

From: Andy King <acking at vmware.com> ** Introduce VM Sockets *** In an effort to improve the out-of-the-box experience with Linux kernels for VMware users, VMware is working on readying the VM Sockets (VSOCK, formerly VMCI Sockets) (vmw_vsock) kernel module for inclusion in the Linux kernel. The purpose of this post is to acquire feedback on the vmw_vsock kernel module. Unlike previous