From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/52] [RFC] virtio-fs: shared file system for virtual machines Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 21:26:48 +0530 Message-ID: <871s4dc85b.fsf@linux.ibm.com> References: <20181210171318.16998-1-vgoyal@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: vgoyal@redhat.com, miklos@szeredi.hu, stefanha@redhat.com, dgilbert@redhat.com, sweil@redhat.com, swhiteho@redhat.com To: Vivek Goyal , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20181210171318.16998-1-vgoyal@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org Vivek Goyal writes: > Hi, > > Here are RFC patches for virtio-fs. Looking for feedback on this approach. > > These patches should apply on top of 4.20-rc5. We have also put code for > various components here. > > https://gitlab.com/virtio-fs > > Problem Description > =================== > We want to be able to take a directory tree on the host and share it with > guest[s]. Our goal is to be able to do it in a fast, consistent and secure > manner. Our primary use case is kata containers, but it should be usable in > other scenarios as well. > > Containers may rely on local file system semantics for shared volumes, > read-write mounts that multiple containers access simultaneously. File > system changes must be visible to other containers with the same consistency > expected of a local file system, including mmap MAP_SHARED. > > Existing Solutions > ================== > We looked at existing solutions and virtio-9p already provides basic shared > file system functionality although does not offer local file system semantics, > causing some workloads and test suites to fail. Can you elaborate on this? Is this with 9p2000.L ? We did quiet a lot of work to make sure posix test suite pass on 9p file system. Also was the mount option with cache=loose? -aneesh