[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v7 RFC] block/vxhs: Initial commit to add Verita

From: Stefan Hajnoczi
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v7 RFC] block/vxhs: Initial commit to add Veritas HyperScale VxHS block device support
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 11:11:35 +0000
User-agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04)

On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 05:44:37AM +0000, Ketan Nilangekar wrote:
> On 11/24/16, 4:07 AM, "Paolo Bonzini" <address@hidden> wrote:
> >On 23/11/2016 23:09, ashish mittal wrote:
> >> On the topic of protocol security -
> >> 
> >> Would it be enough for the first patch to implement only
> >> authentication and not encryption?
> >
> >Yes, of course.  However, as we introduce more and more QEMU-specific
> >characteristics to a protocol that is already QEMU-specific (it doesn't
> >do failover, etc.), I am still not sure of the actual benefit of using
> >libqnio versus having an NBD server or FUSE driver.
> >
> >You have already mentioned performance, but the design has changed so
> >much that I think one of the two things has to change: either failover
> >moves back to QEMU and there is no (closed source) translator running on
> >the node, or the translator needs to speak a well-known and
> >already-supported protocol.
> IMO design has not changed. Implementation has changed significantly. I would 
> propose that we keep resiliency/failover code out of QEMU driver and 
> implement it entirely in libqnio as planned in a subsequent revision. The 
> VxHS server does not need to understand/handle failover at all. 
> Today libqnio gives us significantly better performance than any NBD/FUSE 
> implementation. We know because we have prototyped with both. Significant 
> improvements to libqnio are also in the pipeline which will use cross memory 
> attach calls to further boost performance. Ofcourse a big reason for the 
> performance is also the HyperScale storage backend but we believe this method 
> of IO tapping/redirecting can be leveraged by other solutions as well.

By "cross memory attach" do you mean

That puts us back to square one in terms of security.  You have
(untrusted) QEMU + (untrusted) libqnio directly accessing the memory of
another process on the same machine.  That process is therefore also
untrusted and may only process data for one guest so that guests stay
isolated from each other.

There's an easier way to get even better performance: get rid of libqnio
and the external process.  Move the code from the external process into
QEMU to eliminate the process_vm_readv(2)/process_vm_writev(2) and
context switching.

Can you remind me why there needs to be an external process?


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]