On 27.03.2015 18:47, John Nielsen wrote: > Does anyone have plans (or know about any) to implement virtio-scsi support > in bhyve? That API does support TRIM and should retain most or all of the > low-overhead virtio goodness.
I was thinking about that (not really a plans yet, just some thoughts), but haven't found a good motivation and understanding of whole possible infrastructure. I am not sure it worth to emulate SCSI protocol in addition to already done ATA in ahci-hd and simple block in virtio-blk just to get another, possibly faster then AHCI, block storage with TRIM/UNMAP. Really good SCSI disk emulation in CTL in kernel takes about 20K lines of code. It is pointless to duplicate it, and may be complicated for administration to just interface to it. Indeed I've seen virtio-blk being faster then ahci-hd in some tests, but those tests were highly synthetic. I haven't tested it on real workloads, but I have feeling that real difference may be not that large. If somebody wants to check -- more benchmarks are highly welcome! From the theoretical side I'd like to notice that both ATA and SCSI protocols on guests go through additional ATA/SCSI infrastructure (CAM in FreeBSD), absent in case pure block virtio-blk, so they have some more overhead by definition. Main potential benefit I see from using virtio-scsi is a possibility to pass through to client not a block device, but some real SCSI device. It can be some local DVD writer, or remote iSCSI storage. The last would be especially interesting for large production installations. But the main problem I see here is booting. To make user-level loader boot the kernel from DVD or iSCSI, bhyve has to implement its own SCSI initiator, like small second copy of CAM in user-level. Booting kernel from some other local block storage and then attaching to remote iSCSI storage for data can be much easier, but it is not convenient. It is possible to nt connect to iSCSI directly from user-level, but to make kernel CAM do it, and then make CAM provide both block layer for booting and SCSI layer for virtio-scsi, but I am not sure that it is very good from security point to make host system to see virtual disks. Though may be it could work if CAM could block kernel/GEOM access to them, alike it is done for ZVOLs now, supporting "geom" and "dev" modes. Though that complicates CAM and the whole infrastructure. -- Alexander Motin _______________________________________________ firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-virtualization To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-virtualization-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"