Re: [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] block drivers in user space

From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
To: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
	Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@collabora.com>,
	lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] block drivers in user space
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2022 10:05:11 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2029243d-c39b-8c9a-0b62-cf596e03e060@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <986caf55-65d1-0755-383b-73834ec04967@suse.de>

On 2/21/22 22:57, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> On 2/21/22 20:59, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
>> I'd like to discuss an interface to implement user space block devices,
>> while avoiding local network NBD solutions.  There has been reiterated
>> interest in the topic, both from researchers [1] and from the community,
>> including a proposed session in LSFMM2018 [2] (though I don't think it
>> happened).
>>
>> I've been working on top of the Google iblock implementation to find
>> something upstreamable and would like to present my design and gather
>> feedback on some points, in particular zero-copy and overall user space
>> interface.
>>
>> The design I'm pending towards uses special fds opened by the driver to
>> transfer data to/from the block driver, preferably through direct
>> splicing as much as possible, to keep data only in kernel space.  This
>> is because, in my use case, the driver usually only manipulates
>> metadata, while data is forwarded directly through the network, or
>> similar. It would be neat if we can leverage the existing
>> splice/copy_file_range syscalls such that we don't ever need to bring
>> disk data to user space, if we can avoid it.  I've also experimented
>> with regular pipes, But I found no way around keeping a lot of pipes
>> opened, one for each possible command 'slot'.
>>
>> [1] https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3456727.3463768
>> [2] https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-fsdevel/msg120674.html

There have been more discussions about this topic, e.g. a conversation 
about the Android block-device-in-user-space implementation. See also 
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20201203215859.2719888-1-palmer@dabbelt.com/

> Actually, I'd rather have something like an 'inverse io_uring', where an 
> application creates a memory region separated into several 'ring' for 
> submission and completion.
> Then the kernel could write/map the incoming data onto the rings, and 
> application can read from there.

+1 for using command rings to communicate with user space.

Bart.