Subject: Re: [RFC] Discuss about an new idea "Vsock over Virtio-net"

From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 08:40:06 -0500

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:10:03PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> 
> On 2018/11/30 下午8:55, Jason Wang wrote:
> > 
> > On 2018/11/30 下午8:52, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > >    If you want to compare it with
> > > > > something that would be TCP or QUIC.  The fundamental
> > > > > difference between
> > > > > virtio-vsock and e.g. TCP is that TCP operates in a packet
> > > > > loss environment.
> > > > > So they are using timers for reliability, and receiver is
> > > > > always free to
> > > > > discard any unacked data.
> > > > Virtio-net knows nothing above L2, so they are totally
> > > > transparent to device
> > > > itself. I still don't get why not using virtio-net instead.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks
> > > Is your question why is virtio-vsock used instead of TCP on top of IP
> > > on top of virtio-net?
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > No, my question is why not do vsock through virtio-net.
> > 
> > Thanks
> > 
> 
> Just to clarify, it's not about vosck over ethernet, and it's not about
> inventing new features or APIs. It's probably something like:
> 
> - Let virtio-net driver probe vsock device and do vosck specific things if
> needed to share as much codes.
> 
> - A new kind of sockfd (which is vsock based) for vhost-net for it to do
> vsock specific things (hopefully it can be transparent).
> 
> The change should be totally transparent to userspace applications.
> 
> Thanks

Which code is duplicated between virtio vsock and virtio net right now?

-- 
MST