From: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>
To: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com>
Cc: "Yuanhan Liu" <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
dev@dpdk.org, "Stephen Hemminger" <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, libvir-list@redhat.com,
vpp-dev@lists.fd.io,
"Marc-André Lureau" <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>,
"Flavio Leitner" <fbl@redhat.com>,
"Aaron Conole" <aconole@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] dpdk/vpp and cross-version migration for vhost
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 17:45:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d182d88c-219a-c4ed-4119-a071f1926192@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161209144229.GC24165@redhat.com>
On 12/09/2016 03:42 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 09, 2016 at 02:35:58PM +0100, Maxime Coquelin wrote:
>> ++Daniel for libvirt
>>
>> On 11/24/2016 07:31 AM, Yuanhan Liu wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> As version here is an opaque string for libvirt and qemu,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything can be used - but I suggest either a list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of values defining the interface, e.g.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any_layout=on,max_ring=256
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or a version including the name and vendor of the backend,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> e.g. "org.dpdk.v4.5.6".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The version scheme may not be ideal here. Assume a QEMU is supposed
>>>>>>> to work with a specific DPDK version, however, user may disable some
>>>>>>> newer features through qemu command line, that it also could work with
>>>>>>> an elder DPDK version. Using the version scheme will not allow us doing
>>>>>>> such migration to an elder DPDK version. The MTU is a lively example
>>>>>>> here? (when MTU feature is provided by QEMU but is actually disabled
>>>>>>> by user, that it could also work with an elder DPDK without MTU support).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --yliu
>>>>>
>>>>> OK, so does a list of values look better to you then?
>>> Yes, if there are no better way.
>>>
>>> And I think it may be better to not list all those features, literally.
>>> But instead, using the number should be better, say, features=0xdeadbeef.
>>>
>>> Listing the feature names means we have to come to an agreement in all
>>> components involved here (QEMU, libvirt, DPDK, VPP, and maybe more
>>> backends), that we have to use the exact same feature names. Though it
>>> may not be a big deal, it lacks some flexibility.
>>>
>>> A feature bits will not have this issue.
>>
>> I initially thought having key/value pairs would be more flexible, and
>> could allow migrating to another application if compatible (i.e. from
>> OVS to VPP, and vice versa...) without needing synchronization between
>> the applications.
>>
>> But Daniel pointed me out that it would add a lot of complexity on
>> management tool side, as it would need to know how to interpret these
>> key/value pairs. I think his argument is very valid.
>>
>> So maybe the best way would be the version string, letting the
>> application (OVS-DPDK/VPP/...) specify which version it is
>> compatible with.
>> For the downsides, as soon as a new feature is supported in vhost-user
>> application, the new version will not be advertised as compatible with
>> the previous one, even if the user disables the feature in Qemu (as
>> pointed out by Yuanhan).
>
> We need two distinct capabilities in order to make this work properly.
>
> First, libvirt needs to be able to query the list of (one or more)
> supported versions strings for a given host.
Shouldn't be the role of OpenStack/Neutron? IIUC, libvirt knows nothing
about OVS.
> Second, when launching QEMU we need to be able to specify the desired
> version against the NIC backend.
>
> So, consider host A, initially supporting "ovsdpdk-v1". When libvirt
> launches the VM it will specify 'ovsdpgk-v1' as the desired version
> string to use.
>
> Now some time later you add features X, Y & Z to a new release of
> DPDK and install this on host B. Host B is able to support two
> versions 'ovsdppk-v1' and 'ovsdpdk-v2'. When libvirt launches
> a VM on host B, it'll pick 'ovsdpgk-v2' by default, since that's
> the newest. When libvirt migrates a VM from host A, however,
> it will request the old version 'ovsdpdk-v1' in order to ensure
> compatibility. Similarly when launching a new VM on host B,
> libvirt could choose to use 'ovsdpdk-v1' as the version, in
> order to enable migration to the olver host A, if desired.
>
> This is exactly the way QEMU machine types work, hiding the
> existance of 100's low level settings / default values, that
> a mgmt app would otherwise have to worry about.
I agree on the principle. I need to check what is missing for OVS to
support different versions on different vhost-user ports.
Thanks,
Maxime
>
> Regards,
> Daniel
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-09 16:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-13 17:50 Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-11-16 20:43 ` Maxime Coquelin
2016-11-17 8:29 ` Yuanhan Liu
2016-11-17 8:47 ` Maxime Coquelin
2016-11-17 9:49 ` Yuanhan Liu
2016-11-17 15:25 ` [dpdk-dev] [vpp-dev] " Thomas F Herbert
2016-11-17 17:37 ` [dpdk-dev] " Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-11-22 13:02 ` Yuanhan Liu
2016-11-22 14:53 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-11-24 6:31 ` Yuanhan Liu
2016-11-24 9:30 ` Kevin Traynor
2016-11-24 12:33 ` Yuanhan Liu
2016-11-24 12:47 ` Maxime Coquelin
2016-11-24 15:01 ` Kevin Traynor
2016-11-24 15:24 ` Kavanagh, Mark B
2016-11-28 15:28 ` Maxime Coquelin
2016-11-28 22:18 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-11-29 8:09 ` Maxime Coquelin
2016-12-09 13:35 ` Maxime Coquelin
2016-12-09 14:42 ` Daniel P. Berrange
2016-12-09 16:45 ` Maxime Coquelin [this message]
2016-12-09 16:48 ` Daniel P. Berrange
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=d182d88c-219a-c4ed-4119-a071f1926192@redhat.com \
--to=maxime.coquelin@redhat.com \
--cc=aconole@redhat.com \
--cc=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=fbl@redhat.com \
--cc=libvir-list@redhat.com \
--cc=marcandre.lureau@redhat.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=vpp-dev@lists.fd.io \
--cc=yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).