From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f54.google.com (mail-wm0-f54.google.com [74.125.82.54]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 796862A1A for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 10:52:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm0-f54.google.com with SMTP id u206so25287519wme.1 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 01:52:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:organization:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=VD0rdgSH4lCXqXd/fukNsEm6J7qft1EJ0bk5GnQjTHQ=; b=h2IYkROXs/OHmEAJVo0p68itevYKICDx3wJ80ySh6uDTOiMrVIxd3qevh5LItYNszi D0fmATFOnjukOzFFAHhE1TGdLgV49Ax5MPBkT0RSdNHXJxRtGVEqaqfe05mfJaqGFozb NyfLPH+twIT3R9tHTpJ4Tc5LHnPjQ0MvFEUCGBrlevUb5ItEg8kaZ1OZT21evuVNbUYC 3t+C6VtZYf9vQEie2TZkJRe37B+3GnyeIUfmpswB8Fdu8AVvpP6KDf6ZLHduwem5lyKT 2PQB4AzlhPEZ0oSaBb0MqB7aomHbCv+30fkUzxKanUZLK3QhYU7/ZEVWNXOZO1k5HgY9 Hp6g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:organization :user-agent:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=VD0rdgSH4lCXqXd/fukNsEm6J7qft1EJ0bk5GnQjTHQ=; b=KBeFCI/bFm7eLXsLwz/EIWHKlbcdnxPaBtRI/LzB0fbAaVcDwtwUF1i14pogEcpGXJ hrVtSh9fV3idaDmoAzHv7tZ606mc4R5s2Q1yBbbGuakM3rK1okTsTjRgI1Nw93beZuj1 uVjogIBv8kdj/UDyqrFB2i72kGiTHFU5MHjBc1EN+euTXqV0I7+Q9y2M9SPlUWPyA3oT /gZLR5qli1QcPZ6+V2fNnnXKDHw2wV3AuV74rg5Lx9zJncdVNcVLGq4jGk1OA4LE/Ket jvGugz+wl6Ie41DS5RsTHTmcQHYp5vKLO4CGNTkdM0T4xfzga3TzY8+GnFtKPWJ4Rj3s pH2w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FUH4P8Dkzp4ar75OcQaeSQzKbteQN2IG+QUYF9Jo/nFTE8Vk8yzfP7UqSctgEf/CSZo X-Received: by 10.194.92.132 with SMTP id cm4mr1660060wjb.25.1461660754913; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 01:52:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xps13.localnet (51.111.75.86.rev.sfr.net. [86.75.111.51]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id hk7sm1589741wjb.5.2016.04.26.01.52.33 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 26 Apr 2016 01:52:34 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Yuanhan Liu Cc: Christian Ehrhardt , Aaron Conole , dev@dpdk.org, "Xie, Huawei" , David Marchand , Panu Matilainen Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 10:52:32 +0200 Message-ID: <1821126.OuT4M3UuqJ@xps13> Organization: 6WIND User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.1.6-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20160426041637.GE7832@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> References: <1461575896-17409-1-git-send-email-christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com> <20160426041637.GE7832@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] eal: provide option to set vhost_user socket owner/permissions X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 08:52:35 -0000 2016-04-25 21:16, Yuanhan Liu: > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 11:18:16AM +0200, Christian Ehrhardt wrote: > > The API doesn't hold a way to specify a owner/permission set for vhost_user > > created sockets. > > Yes, it's kind of like a known issue. So, thanks for bringing it, with > a solution, for dicussion (cc'ed more people). [...] > > But I'd be interested if DPDK in general would be interested in: > > a) an approach like this? > > You were trying to add a vhost specific stuff as EAL command option, > which is something we might should try to avoid. Yes, -1 > > b) would prefer a change of the API? > > Adding a new option to the current register API might will not work well, > either. It gives you no ability to do a dynamic change later. I mean, > taking OVS as an example, OVS provides you the flexible ability to do all > kinds of configuration in a dynamic way, say number of rx queues. If we > do the permissions setup in the register time, there would be no way to > change it later, right? > > So, I'm thinking that we may could add a new API for that? It then would > allow applications to change it at anytime. A vhost API in the library? And for vhost PMD? What about devargs parameters? > > c) consider it an issue of consuming projects and let them take care? > > It's not exactly an issue of consuming projects; we created the socket > file after all. Yes