| Message ID | 20200116172428.311437-1-sgarzare@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | vsock: support network namespace | expand |
What should vsock_dev_do_ioctl() IOCTL_VM_SOCKETS_GET_LOCAL_CID return? The answer is probably dependent on the caller's network namespace. Ultimately we may need per-namespace transports. Imagine assigning a G2H transport to a specific network namespace. vsock_stream_connect() needs to be namespace-aware so that other namespaces cannot use the G2H transport to send a connection establishment packet.
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 03:50:53PM +0000, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > What should vsock_dev_do_ioctl() IOCTL_VM_SOCKETS_GET_LOCAL_CID return? > The answer is probably dependent on the caller's network namespace. Right, and I'm not handling this case. I'll fix! > > Ultimately we may need per-namespace transports. Imagine assigning a > G2H transport to a specific network namespace. Agree. > > vsock_stream_connect() needs to be namespace-aware so that other > namespaces cannot use the G2H transport to send a connection > establishment packet. Right, maybe I can change the vsock_assign_transport() to check if a transport can be assigned to a socket, checking the namespace. I'll send a v2 handling these cases and implementing the Michael's idea about /dev/vhost-vsock-netns Thanks, Stefano
Hi David, Michael, Stefan,
I'm restarting to work on this topic since Kata guys are interested to
have that, especially on the guest side.
While working on the v2 I had few doubts, and I'd like to have your
suggestions:
1. netns assigned to the device inside the guest
Currently I assigned this device to 'init_net'. Maybe it is better
if we allow the user to decide which netns assign to the device
or to disable this new feature to have the same behavior as before
(host reachable from any netns).
I think we can handle this in the vsock core and not in the single
transports.
The simplest way that I found, is to add a new
IOCTL_VM_SOCKETS_ASSIGN_G2H_NETNS to /dev/vsock to enable the feature
and assign the device to the same netns of the process that do the
ioctl(), but I'm not sure it is clean enough.
Maybe it is better to add new rtnetlink messages, but I'm not sure if
it is feasible since we don't have a netdev device.
What do you suggest?
2. netns assigned in the host
As Michael suggested, I added a new /dev/vhost-vsock-netns to allow
userspace application to use this new feature, leaving to
/dev/vhost-vsock the previous behavior (guest reachable from any
netns).
I like this approach, but I had these doubts:
- I need to allocate a new minor for that device (e.g.
VHOST_VSOCK_NETNS_MINOR) or is there an alternative way that I can
use?
- It is vhost-vsock specific, should we provide something handled in
the vsock core, maybe centralizing the CID allocation and adding a
new IOCTL or rtnetlink message like for the guest side?
(maybe it could be a second step, and for now we can continue with
the new device)
Thanks for the help,
Stefano
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 06:24:25PM +0100, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> RFC -> v1:
> * added 'netns' module param to vsock.ko to enable the
> network namespace support (disabled by default)
> * added 'vsock_net_eq()' to check the "net" assigned to a socket
> only when 'netns' support is enabled
>
> RFC: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/cover/1202235/
>
> Now that we have multi-transport upstream, I started to take a look to
> support network namespace in vsock.
>
> As we partially discussed in the multi-transport proposal [1], it could
> be nice to support network namespace in vsock to reach the following
> goals:
> - isolate host applications from guest applications using the same ports
> with CID_ANY
> - assign the same CID of VMs running in different network namespaces
> - partition VMs between VMMs or at finer granularity
>
> This new feature is disabled by default, because it changes vsock's
> behavior with network namespaces and could break existing applications.
> It can be enabled with the new 'netns' module parameter of vsock.ko.
>
> This implementation provides the following behavior:
> - packets received from the host (received by G2H transports) are
> assigned to the default netns (init_net)
> - packets received from the guest (received by H2G - vhost-vsock) are
> assigned to the netns of the process that opens /dev/vhost-vsock
> (usually the VMM, qemu in my tests, opens the /dev/vhost-vsock)
> - for vmci I need some suggestions, because I don't know how to do
> and test the same in the vmci driver, for now vmci uses the
> init_net
> - loopback packets are exchanged only in the same netns
>
> I tested the series in this way:
> l0_host$ qemu-system-x86_64 -m 4G -M accel=kvm -smp 4 \
> -drive file=/tmp/vsockvm0.img,if=virtio --nographic \
> -device vhost-vsock-pci,guest-cid=3
>
> l1_vm$ echo 1 > /sys/module/vsock/parameters/netns
>
> l1_vm$ ip netns add ns1
> l1_vm$ ip netns add ns2
> # same CID on different netns
> l1_vm$ ip netns exec ns1 qemu-system-x86_64 -m 1G -M accel=kvm -smp 2 \
> -drive file=/tmp/vsockvm1.img,if=virtio --nographic \
> -device vhost-vsock-pci,guest-cid=4
> l1_vm$ ip netns exec ns2 qemu-system-x86_64 -m 1G -M accel=kvm -smp 2 \
> -drive file=/tmp/vsockvm2.img,if=virtio --nographic \
> -device vhost-vsock-pci,guest-cid=4
>
> # all iperf3 listen on CID_ANY and port 5201, but in different netns
> l1_vm$ ./iperf3 --vsock -s # connection from l0 or guests started
> # on default netns (init_net)
> l1_vm$ ip netns exec ns1 ./iperf3 --vsock -s
> l1_vm$ ip netns exec ns1 ./iperf3 --vsock -s
>
> l0_host$ ./iperf3 --vsock -c 3
> l2_vm1$ ./iperf3 --vsock -c 2
> l2_vm2$ ./iperf3 --vsock -c 2
>
> [1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg575792.html
>
> Stefano Garzarella (3):
> vsock: add network namespace support
> vsock/virtio_transport_common: handle netns of received packets
> vhost/vsock: use netns of process that opens the vhost-vsock device
>
> drivers/vhost/vsock.c | 29 ++++++++++++-----
> include/linux/virtio_vsock.h | 2 ++
> include/net/af_vsock.h | 7 +++--
> net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++------
> net/vmw_vsock/hyperv_transport.c | 5 +--
> net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c | 2 ++
> net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c | 12 ++++++--
> net/vmw_vsock/vmci_transport.c | 5 +--
> 8 files changed, 78 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.24.1
>
On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 04:25:18PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > Hi David, Michael, Stefan, > I'm restarting to work on this topic since Kata guys are interested to > have that, especially on the guest side. > > While working on the v2 I had few doubts, and I'd like to have your > suggestions: > > 1. netns assigned to the device inside the guest > > Currently I assigned this device to 'init_net'. Maybe it is better > if we allow the user to decide which netns assign to the device > or to disable this new feature to have the same behavior as before > (host reachable from any netns). > I think we can handle this in the vsock core and not in the single > transports. > > The simplest way that I found, is to add a new > IOCTL_VM_SOCKETS_ASSIGN_G2H_NETNS to /dev/vsock to enable the feature > and assign the device to the same netns of the process that do the > ioctl(), but I'm not sure it is clean enough. > > Maybe it is better to add new rtnetlink messages, but I'm not sure if > it is feasible since we don't have a netdev device. > > What do you suggest? Maybe /dev/vsock-netns here too, like in the host? > > 2. netns assigned in the host > > As Michael suggested, I added a new /dev/vhost-vsock-netns to allow > userspace application to use this new feature, leaving to > /dev/vhost-vsock the previous behavior (guest reachable from any > netns). > > I like this approach, but I had these doubts: > > - I need to allocate a new minor for that device (e.g. > VHOST_VSOCK_NETNS_MINOR) or is there an alternative way that I can > use? Not that I see. I agree it's a bit annoying. I'll think about it a bit. > - It is vhost-vsock specific, should we provide something handled in > the vsock core, maybe centralizing the CID allocation and adding a > new IOCTL or rtnetlink message like for the guest side? > (maybe it could be a second step, and for now we can continue with > the new device) > > > Thanks for the help, > Stefano > > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 06:24:25PM +0100, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > > RFC -> v1: > > * added 'netns' module param to vsock.ko to enable the > > network namespace support (disabled by default) > > * added 'vsock_net_eq()' to check the "net" assigned to a socket > > only when 'netns' support is enabled > > > > RFC: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/cover/1202235/ > > > > Now that we have multi-transport upstream, I started to take a look to > > support network namespace in vsock. > > > > As we partially discussed in the multi-transport proposal [1], it could > > be nice to support network namespace in vsock to reach the following > > goals: > > - isolate host applications from guest applications using the same ports > > with CID_ANY > > - assign the same CID of VMs running in different network namespaces > > - partition VMs between VMMs or at finer granularity > > > > This new feature is disabled by default, because it changes vsock's > > behavior with network namespaces and could break existing applications. > > It can be enabled with the new 'netns' module parameter of vsock.ko. > > > > This implementation provides the following behavior: > > - packets received from the host (received by G2H transports) are > > assigned to the default netns (init_net) > > - packets received from the guest (received by H2G - vhost-vsock) are > > assigned to the netns of the process that opens /dev/vhost-vsock > > (usually the VMM, qemu in my tests, opens the /dev/vhost-vsock) > > - for vmci I need some suggestions, because I don't know how to do > > and test the same in the vmci driver, for now vmci uses the > > init_net > > - loopback packets are exchanged only in the same netns > > > > I tested the series in this way: > > l0_host$ qemu-system-x86_64 -m 4G -M accel=kvm -smp 4 \ > > -drive file=/tmp/vsockvm0.img,if=virtio --nographic \ > > -device vhost-vsock-pci,guest-cid=3 > > > > l1_vm$ echo 1 > /sys/module/vsock/parameters/netns > > > > l1_vm$ ip netns add ns1 > > l1_vm$ ip netns add ns2 > > # same CID on different netns > > l1_vm$ ip netns exec ns1 qemu-system-x86_64 -m 1G -M accel=kvm -smp 2 \ > > -drive file=/tmp/vsockvm1.img,if=virtio --nographic \ > > -device vhost-vsock-pci,guest-cid=4 > > l1_vm$ ip netns exec ns2 qemu-system-x86_64 -m 1G -M accel=kvm -smp 2 \ > > -drive file=/tmp/vsockvm2.img,if=virtio --nographic \ > > -device vhost-vsock-pci,guest-cid=4 > > > > # all iperf3 listen on CID_ANY and port 5201, but in different netns > > l1_vm$ ./iperf3 --vsock -s # connection from l0 or guests started > > # on default netns (init_net) > > l1_vm$ ip netns exec ns1 ./iperf3 --vsock -s > > l1_vm$ ip netns exec ns1 ./iperf3 --vsock -s > > > > l0_host$ ./iperf3 --vsock -c 3 > > l2_vm1$ ./iperf3 --vsock -c 2 > > l2_vm2$ ./iperf3 --vsock -c 2 > > > > [1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg575792.html > > > > Stefano Garzarella (3): > > vsock: add network namespace support > > vsock/virtio_transport_common: handle netns of received packets > > vhost/vsock: use netns of process that opens the vhost-vsock device > > > > drivers/vhost/vsock.c | 29 ++++++++++++----- > > include/linux/virtio_vsock.h | 2 ++ > > include/net/af_vsock.h | 7 +++-- > > net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++------ > > net/vmw_vsock/hyperv_transport.c | 5 +-- > > net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c | 2 ++ > > net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c | 12 ++++++-- > > net/vmw_vsock/vmci_transport.c | 5 +-- > > 8 files changed, 78 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > > > > -- > > 2.24.1 > >
On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 10:31:57AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 04:25:18PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > > Hi David, Michael, Stefan, > > I'm restarting to work on this topic since Kata guys are interested to > > have that, especially on the guest side. > > > > While working on the v2 I had few doubts, and I'd like to have your > > suggestions: > > > > 1. netns assigned to the device inside the guest > > > > Currently I assigned this device to 'init_net'. Maybe it is better > > if we allow the user to decide which netns assign to the device > > or to disable this new feature to have the same behavior as before > > (host reachable from any netns). > > I think we can handle this in the vsock core and not in the single > > transports. > > > > The simplest way that I found, is to add a new > > IOCTL_VM_SOCKETS_ASSIGN_G2H_NETNS to /dev/vsock to enable the feature > > and assign the device to the same netns of the process that do the > > ioctl(), but I'm not sure it is clean enough. > > > > Maybe it is better to add new rtnetlink messages, but I'm not sure if > > it is feasible since we don't have a netdev device. > > > > What do you suggest? > > Maybe /dev/vsock-netns here too, like in the host? > I'm not sure I get it. In the guest, /dev/vsock is only used to get the CID assigned to the guest through an ioctl(). In the virtio-vsock case, the guest transport is loaded when it is discovered on the PCI bus, so we need a way to "move" it to a netns or to specify which netns should be used when it is probed. > > > > > 2. netns assigned in the host > > > > As Michael suggested, I added a new /dev/vhost-vsock-netns to allow > > userspace application to use this new feature, leaving to > > /dev/vhost-vsock the previous behavior (guest reachable from any > > netns). > > > > I like this approach, but I had these doubts: > > > > - I need to allocate a new minor for that device (e.g. > > VHOST_VSOCK_NETNS_MINOR) or is there an alternative way that I can > > use? > > Not that I see. I agree it's a bit annoying. I'll think about it a bit. > Thanks for that! An idea that I had, was to add a new ioctl to /dev/vhost-vsock to enable the netns support, but I'm not sure it is a clean approach. > > - It is vhost-vsock specific, should we provide something handled in > > the vsock core, maybe centralizing the CID allocation and adding a > > new IOCTL or rtnetlink message like for the guest side? > > (maybe it could be a second step, and for now we can continue with > > the new device) > > Thanks, Stefano
On 2020/4/27 下午10:25, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > Hi David, Michael, Stefan, > I'm restarting to work on this topic since Kata guys are interested to > have that, especially on the guest side. > > While working on the v2 I had few doubts, and I'd like to have your > suggestions: > > 1. netns assigned to the device inside the guest > > Currently I assigned this device to 'init_net'. Maybe it is better > if we allow the user to decide which netns assign to the device > or to disable this new feature to have the same behavior as before > (host reachable from any netns). > I think we can handle this in the vsock core and not in the single > transports. > > The simplest way that I found, is to add a new > IOCTL_VM_SOCKETS_ASSIGN_G2H_NETNS to /dev/vsock to enable the feature > and assign the device to the same netns of the process that do the > ioctl(), but I'm not sure it is clean enough. > > Maybe it is better to add new rtnetlink messages, but I'm not sure if > it is feasible since we don't have a netdev device. > > What do you suggest? As we've discussed, it should be a netdev probably in either guest or host side. And it would be much simpler if we want do implement namespace then. No new API is needed. Thanks > > > 2. netns assigned in the host > > As Michael suggested, I added a new /dev/vhost-vsock-netns to allow > userspace application to use this new feature, leaving to > /dev/vhost-vsock the previous behavior (guest reachable from any > netns). > > I like this approach, but I had these doubts: > > - I need to allocate a new minor for that device (e.g. > VHOST_VSOCK_NETNS_MINOR) or is there an alternative way that I can > use? > > - It is vhost-vsock specific, should we provide something handled in > the vsock core, maybe centralizing the CID allocation and adding a > new IOCTL or rtnetlink message like for the guest side? > (maybe it could be a second step, and for now we can continue with > the new device) > > > Thanks for the help, > Stefano > > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 06:24:25PM +0100, Stefano Garzarella wrote: >> RFC -> v1: >> * added 'netns' module param to vsock.ko to enable the >> network namespace support (disabled by default) >> * added 'vsock_net_eq()' to check the "net" assigned to a socket >> only when 'netns' support is enabled >> >> RFC: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/cover/1202235/ >> >> Now that we have multi-transport upstream, I started to take a look to >> support network namespace in vsock. >> >> As we partially discussed in the multi-transport proposal [1], it could >> be nice to support network namespace in vsock to reach the following >> goals: >> - isolate host applications from guest applications using the same ports >> with CID_ANY >> - assign the same CID of VMs running in different network namespaces >> - partition VMs between VMMs or at finer granularity >> >> This new feature is disabled by default, because it changes vsock's >> behavior with network namespaces and could break existing applications. >> It can be enabled with the new 'netns' module parameter of vsock.ko. >> >> This implementation provides the following behavior: >> - packets received from the host (received by G2H transports) are >> assigned to the default netns (init_net) >> - packets received from the guest (received by H2G - vhost-vsock) are >> assigned to the netns of the process that opens /dev/vhost-vsock >> (usually the VMM, qemu in my tests, opens the /dev/vhost-vsock) >> - for vmci I need some suggestions, because I don't know how to do >> and test the same in the vmci driver, for now vmci uses the >> init_net >> - loopback packets are exchanged only in the same netns >> >> I tested the series in this way: >> l0_host$ qemu-system-x86_64 -m 4G -M accel=kvm -smp 4 \ >> -drive file=/tmp/vsockvm0.img,if=virtio --nographic \ >> -device vhost-vsock-pci,guest-cid=3 >> >> l1_vm$ echo 1 > /sys/module/vsock/parameters/netns >> >> l1_vm$ ip netns add ns1 >> l1_vm$ ip netns add ns2 >> # same CID on different netns >> l1_vm$ ip netns exec ns1 qemu-system-x86_64 -m 1G -M accel=kvm -smp 2 \ >> -drive file=/tmp/vsockvm1.img,if=virtio --nographic \ >> -device vhost-vsock-pci,guest-cid=4 >> l1_vm$ ip netns exec ns2 qemu-system-x86_64 -m 1G -M accel=kvm -smp 2 \ >> -drive file=/tmp/vsockvm2.img,if=virtio --nographic \ >> -device vhost-vsock-pci,guest-cid=4 >> >> # all iperf3 listen on CID_ANY and port 5201, but in different netns >> l1_vm$ ./iperf3 --vsock -s # connection from l0 or guests started >> # on default netns (init_net) >> l1_vm$ ip netns exec ns1 ./iperf3 --vsock -s >> l1_vm$ ip netns exec ns1 ./iperf3 --vsock -s >> >> l0_host$ ./iperf3 --vsock -c 3 >> l2_vm1$ ./iperf3 --vsock -c 2 >> l2_vm2$ ./iperf3 --vsock -c 2 >> >> [1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg575792.html >> >> Stefano Garzarella (3): >> vsock: add network namespace support >> vsock/virtio_transport_common: handle netns of received packets >> vhost/vsock: use netns of process that opens the vhost-vsock device >> >> drivers/vhost/vsock.c | 29 ++++++++++++----- >> include/linux/virtio_vsock.h | 2 ++ >> include/net/af_vsock.h | 7 +++-- >> net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++------ >> net/vmw_vsock/hyperv_transport.c | 5 +-- >> net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c | 2 ++ >> net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c | 12 ++++++-- >> net/vmw_vsock/vmci_transport.c | 5 +-- >> 8 files changed, 78 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) >> >> -- >> 2.24.1 >>
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 04:13:22PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > On 2020/4/27 下午10:25, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > > Hi David, Michael, Stefan, > > I'm restarting to work on this topic since Kata guys are interested to > > have that, especially on the guest side. > > > > While working on the v2 I had few doubts, and I'd like to have your > > suggestions: > > > > 1. netns assigned to the device inside the guest > > > > Currently I assigned this device to 'init_net'. Maybe it is better > > if we allow the user to decide which netns assign to the device > > or to disable this new feature to have the same behavior as before > > (host reachable from any netns). > > I think we can handle this in the vsock core and not in the single > > transports. > > > > The simplest way that I found, is to add a new > > IOCTL_VM_SOCKETS_ASSIGN_G2H_NETNS to /dev/vsock to enable the feature > > and assign the device to the same netns of the process that do the > > ioctl(), but I'm not sure it is clean enough. > > > > Maybe it is better to add new rtnetlink messages, but I'm not sure if > > it is feasible since we don't have a netdev device. > > > > What do you suggest? > > > As we've discussed, it should be a netdev probably in either guest or host > side. And it would be much simpler if we want do implement namespace then. > No new API is needed. > Thanks Jason! It would be cool, but I don't have much experience on netdev. Do you see any particular obstacles? I'll take a look to understand how to do it, surely in the guest would be very useful to have the vsock device as a netdev and maybe also in the host. Stefano
On 2020/4/29 上午12:00, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 04:13:22PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >> On 2020/4/27 下午10:25, Stefano Garzarella wrote: >>> Hi David, Michael, Stefan, >>> I'm restarting to work on this topic since Kata guys are interested to >>> have that, especially on the guest side. >>> >>> While working on the v2 I had few doubts, and I'd like to have your >>> suggestions: >>> >>> 1. netns assigned to the device inside the guest >>> >>> Currently I assigned this device to 'init_net'. Maybe it is better >>> if we allow the user to decide which netns assign to the device >>> or to disable this new feature to have the same behavior as before >>> (host reachable from any netns). >>> I think we can handle this in the vsock core and not in the single >>> transports. >>> >>> The simplest way that I found, is to add a new >>> IOCTL_VM_SOCKETS_ASSIGN_G2H_NETNS to /dev/vsock to enable the feature >>> and assign the device to the same netns of the process that do the >>> ioctl(), but I'm not sure it is clean enough. >>> >>> Maybe it is better to add new rtnetlink messages, but I'm not sure if >>> it is feasible since we don't have a netdev device. >>> >>> What do you suggest? >> As we've discussed, it should be a netdev probably in either guest or host >> side. And it would be much simpler if we want do implement namespace then. >> No new API is needed. >> > Thanks Jason! > > It would be cool, but I don't have much experience on netdev. > Do you see any particular obstacles? I don't see but if there's we can try to find a solution or ask for netdev experts for that. I do hear from somebody that is interested in having netdev in the past. > > I'll take a look to understand how to do it, surely in the guest would > be very useful to have the vsock device as a netdev and maybe also in the host. Yes, it's worth to have a try then we will have a unified management interface and we will benefit from it in the future. Starting form guest is good idea which should be less complicated than host. Thanks > > Stefano >
RFC -> v1: * added 'netns' module param to vsock.ko to enable the network namespace support (disabled by default) * added 'vsock_net_eq()' to check the "net" assigned to a socket only when 'netns' support is enabled RFC: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/cover/1202235/ Now that we have multi-transport upstream, I started to take a look to support network namespace in vsock. As we partially discussed in the multi-transport proposal [1], it could be nice to support network namespace in vsock to reach the following goals: - isolate host applications from guest applications using the same ports with CID_ANY - assign the same CID of VMs running in different network namespaces - partition VMs between VMMs or at finer granularity This new feature is disabled by default, because it changes vsock's behavior with network namespaces and could break existing applications. It can be enabled with the new 'netns' module parameter of vsock.ko. This implementation provides the following behavior: - packets received from the host (received by G2H transports) are assigned to the default netns (init_net) - packets received from the guest (received by H2G - vhost-vsock) are assigned to the netns of the process that opens /dev/vhost-vsock (usually the VMM, qemu in my tests, opens the /dev/vhost-vsock) - for vmci I need some suggestions, because I don't know how to do and test the same in the vmci driver, for now vmci uses the init_net - loopback packets are exchanged only in the same netns I tested the series in this way: l0_host$ qemu-system-x86_64 -m 4G -M accel=kvm -smp 4 \ -drive file=/tmp/vsockvm0.img,if=virtio --nographic \ -device vhost-vsock-pci,guest-cid=3 l1_vm$ echo 1 > /sys/module/vsock/parameters/netns l1_vm$ ip netns add ns1 l1_vm$ ip netns add ns2 # same CID on different netns l1_vm$ ip netns exec ns1 qemu-system-x86_64 -m 1G -M accel=kvm -smp 2 \ -drive file=/tmp/vsockvm1.img,if=virtio --nographic \ -device vhost-vsock-pci,guest-cid=4 l1_vm$ ip netns exec ns2 qemu-system-x86_64 -m 1G -M accel=kvm -smp 2 \ -drive file=/tmp/vsockvm2.img,if=virtio --nographic \ -device vhost-vsock-pci,guest-cid=4 # all iperf3 listen on CID_ANY and port 5201, but in different netns l1_vm$ ./iperf3 --vsock -s # connection from l0 or guests started # on default netns (init_net) l1_vm$ ip netns exec ns1 ./iperf3 --vsock -s l1_vm$ ip netns exec ns1 ./iperf3 --vsock -s l0_host$ ./iperf3 --vsock -c 3 l2_vm1$ ./iperf3 --vsock -c 2 l2_vm2$ ./iperf3 --vsock -c 2 [1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg575792.html Stefano Garzarella (3): vsock: add network namespace support vsock/virtio_transport_common: handle netns of received packets vhost/vsock: use netns of process that opens the vhost-vsock device drivers/vhost/vsock.c | 29 ++++++++++++----- include/linux/virtio_vsock.h | 2 ++ include/net/af_vsock.h | 7 +++-- net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++------ net/vmw_vsock/hyperv_transport.c | 5 +-- net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c | 2 ++ net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c | 12 ++++++-- net/vmw_vsock/vmci_transport.c | 5 +-- 8 files changed, 78 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)