From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-189.mta0.migadu.com (out-189.mta0.migadu.com [91.218.175.189]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E444225D7 for ; Thu, 30 May 2024 17:30:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.189 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1717090256; cv=none; b=SE6to9HL3q4CdAGPc+PLmQ0K/xUl52lCd71Tu5WBA7SNviVpqyEugAVQ6hDhMhr6hGl8l3OhhIx63QAPTQygfHkOtOnMVFUXoRlNpLXaoYcgKXnbq9Jl04KBsnsRU6wJjj3g3mUkbNdKSm8QyngPVeop5RhTvAwcbVc36faqIaE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1717090256; c=relaxed/simple; bh=3iuhRs7RtzHZ9/IxtZbUZoxfy3hEq7TsUY7P+NXCbcc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=lVXqImUArVmdaghjZRjeODkJnuNWbWG49GDCRCpiFfYDHWkdp8yw//Ya20jMYTiBtnLChSxXPDTSu0n6ZXckKEY/SRoO+5Vbed80bY89aSo4URT4TlP0OyBhPR/zlKkPXuN27g7K382FNiuHUySGLv2zy2SGVpTpRgo2HL/RnUo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=oUUw/Ooo; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.189 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="oUUw/Ooo" X-Envelope-To: bernd.schubert@fastmail.fm DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1717090252; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ecBfK0D4e0ZtUSrQeyfZauk9M9aepqKnh3roZbh5Nf8=; b=oUUw/OoovYnnLnrdEVwdHTMajTqLF2cQNCncP6NGiORTdI3lESWwM3dQR8Lztsry6etEFW 90mbdosQXPjpkJAULqT7M8kVkqhDisKR2gxp+0OLkr+DyaFIrio8U6YWEGBba2dLtHPAE0 34Hl7V1ZETx25lWx/8Nw641kX4+Uoqg= X-Envelope-To: bschubert@ddn.com X-Envelope-To: miklos@szeredi.hu X-Envelope-To: amir73il@gmail.com X-Envelope-To: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org X-Envelope-To: akpm@linux-foundation.org X-Envelope-To: linux-mm@kvack.org X-Envelope-To: mingo@redhat.com X-Envelope-To: peterz@infradead.org X-Envelope-To: avagin@google.com X-Envelope-To: io-uring@vger.kernel.org X-Envelope-To: axboe@kernel.dk X-Envelope-To: ming.lei@redhat.com X-Envelope-To: asml.silence@gmail.com X-Envelope-To: josef@toxicpanda.com Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 13:30:48 -0400 X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Kent Overstreet To: Bernd Schubert Cc: Bernd Schubert , Miklos Szeredi , Amir Goldstein , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Andrei Vagin , io-uring@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe , Ming Lei , Pavel Begunkov , Josef Bacik Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 00/19] fuse: fuse-over-io-uring Message-ID: References: <20240529-fuse-uring-for-6-9-rfc2-out-v1-0-d149476b1d65@ddn.com> <5mimjjxul2sc2g7x6pttnit46pbw3astwj2giqfr4xayp63el2@fb5bgtiavwgv> <8c3548a9-3b15-49c4-9e38-68d81433144a@fastmail.fm> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: io-uring@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 06:17:29PM +0200, Bernd Schubert wrote: > > > On 5/30/24 18:10, Kent Overstreet wrote: > > On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 06:02:21PM +0200, Bernd Schubert wrote: > >> Hmm, initially I had thought about writing my own ring buffer, but then > >> io-uring got IORING_OP_URING_CMD, which seems to have exactly what we > >> need? From interface point of view, io-uring seems easy to use here, > >> has everything we need and kind of the same thing is used for ublk - > >> what speaks against io-uring? And what other suggestion do you have? > >> > >> I guess the same concern would also apply to ublk_drv. > >> > >> Well, decoupling from io-uring might help to get for zero-copy, as there > >> doesn't seem to be an agreement with Mings approaches (sorry I'm only > >> silently following for now). > >> > >> From our side, a customer has pointed out security concerns for io-uring. > >> My thinking so far was to implemented the required io-uring pieces into > >> an module and access it with ioctls... Which would also allow to > >> backport it to RHEL8/RHEL9. > > > > Well, I've been starting to sketch out a ringbuffer() syscall, which > > would work on any (supported) file descriptor and give you a ringbuffer > > for reading or writing (or call it twice for both). > > > > That seems to be what fuse really wants, no? You're already using a file > > descriptor and your own RPC format, you just want a faster > > communications channel. > > Fine with me, if you have something better/simpler with less security > concerns - why not. We just need a community agreement on that. > > Do you have something I could look at? Like I said it's at the early sketch stage, I haven't written any code yet. But I'm envisioning something very simple - just a syscall that gives you a mapped buffer of a specified size with head and tail pointers. But this has been kicking around for awhile, so if you're interested I could probably have something for you to try out in the next few days.