On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 1:17 PM Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.od...@daynix.com> wrote:
>
> On 2025/01/13 11:59, Jason Wang wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 11, 2025 at 1:43 PM Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.od...@daynix.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Jason,
> >>
> >> Can you check this patch again?
> >
> > I would like to have this if
> >
> > 1) it would be used by libvirt.
> >
> > or
> >
> > 2) there's no other way to do this
>
> I need this to make QEMU work with macvtap on mkosi, and this patch is
> an effective way to accomplish the goal.
I'm not sure how to define "effective" here.
>
> Requiring to pass a file descriptor is simply less convenient. Most (if
> not all) aspects of QEMU can be configured without file descriptors; I
> don't think there is a reason to make tap exceptional.
TUNSETIFF requires CAP_NET_ADMIN and qemu doesn't want to run with
privilege, so fd is prefered in the case of tuntap.
For macvtap,ipvtap, though open, doesn't require any privilege.
Passing fd via SCM_RIGHTS is still preferable as it eases the
interaction with security facilities (for example, you may want to
whitelist /dev/tapX for Qemu to access etc).
Thanks
>
> Regards,
> Akihiko Odaki
>
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Akihiko Odaki
> >>
> >> On 2024/10/22 13:59, Akihiko Odaki wrote:
> >>> On 2024/10/18 17:10, Jason Wang wrote:
> >>>> On Sat, Oct 12, 2024 at 5:05 PM Akihiko Odaki
> >>>> <akihiko.od...@daynix.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 2024/10/09 16:41, Jason Wang wrote:
> >>>>>> On Tue, Oct 8, 2024 at 2:52 PM Akihiko Odaki
> >>>>>> <akihiko.od...@daynix.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> ipvtap and macvtap create a file for each interface unlike tuntap,
> >>>>>>> which
> >>>>>>> creates one file shared by all interfaces. Try to open a file
> >>>>>>> dedicated
> >>>>>>> to the interface first for ipvtap and macvtap.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Management layers usually pass these fds via SCM_RIGHTS. Is this for
> >>>>>> testing purposes? (Note that we can use something like -netdev
> >>>>>> tap,fd=10 10<>/dev/tap0).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I used this for testing.
> >>>>
> >>>> Anything that prevents you from using fd redirection? If not
> >>>> management interest and we had already had a way for testing, I tend
> >>>> to not introduce new code as it may bring bugs.
> >>>
> >>> I don't know what ifindex the macvtap device has so it's easier to use
> >>> if QEMU can automatically figure out the it.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.od...@daynix.com>
> >>>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>> net/tap-linux.c | 17 ++++++++++++++---
> >>>>>>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> diff --git a/net/tap-linux.c b/net/tap-linux.c
> >>>>>>> index 1226d5fda2d9..22ec2f45d2b7 100644
> >>>>>>> --- a/net/tap-linux.c
> >>>>>>> +++ b/net/tap-linux.c
> >>>>>>> @@ -45,10 +45,21 @@ int tap_open(char *ifname, int ifname_size, int
> >>>>>>> *vnet_hdr,
> >>>>>>> int len = sizeof(struct virtio_net_hdr);
> >>>>>>> unsigned int features;
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> - fd = RETRY_ON_EINTR(open(PATH_NET_TUN, O_RDWR));
> >>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>> + ret = if_nametoindex(ifname);
> >>>>>>> + if (ret) {
> >>>>>>> + g_autofree char *file = g_strdup_printf("/dev/tap%d", ret);
> >>>>>>> + fd = open(file, O_RDWR);
> >>>>>>> + } else {
> >>>>>>> + fd = -1;
> >>>>>>> + }
> >>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>> if (fd < 0) {
> >>>>>>> - error_setg_errno(errp, errno, "could not open %s",
> >>>>>>> PATH_NET_TUN);
> >>>>>>> - return -1;
> >>>>>>> + fd = RETRY_ON_EINTR(open(PATH_NET_TUN, O_RDWR));
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Any reason tuntap were tried after the macvtap/ipvtap?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If we try tuntap first, we will know that it is not tuntap when calling
> >>>>> TUNSETIFF. We will need to call TUNGETFEATURES and TUNSETVNETHDRSZ again
> >>>>> in such a case because they precede TUNSETIFF. Calling them twice is
> >>>>> troublesome.
> >>>>
> >>>> I may miss something, we are only at the phase of open() not TUNSETIFF?
> >>>
> >>> We can tell if it is macvtap/ipvtap just by trying opening the device
> >>> file. That is not possible with tuntap because tuntap uses /dev/net/tun,
> >>> a device file common for all tuntap interfaces and its presence does not
> >>> tell if the interface is tuntap.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This is also consistent with libvirt. libvirt first checks if
> >>>>> g_strdup_printf("/dev/tap%d", ifindex) exists, and falls back to tuntap
> >>>>> otherwise.
> >>>>
> >>>> This is not what I understand from how layered products work. Libvirt
> >>>> should align with Qemu for low level things like TAP, not the reverse.
> >>>
> >>> This change is intended for the use case where libvirt is not in use. In
> >>> particular, I use mkosi, which is not a full fledged layering mechanism.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Akihiko Odaki
> >>
> >
>
