linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] extending splice for copy offloading

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 30 Sep 2013 20:27:30 +0000
From:	"Myklebust, Trond" <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>
To:	Ric Wheeler <rwheeler@...hat.com>
CC:	Bernd Schubert <bernd.schubert@...m.fraunhofer.de>,
	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
	Zach Brown <zab@...hat.com>,
	Anna Schumaker <schumaker.anna@...il.com>,
	"Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux-Fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Schumaker, Bryan" <Bryan.Schumaker@...app.com>,
	"Martin K. Petersen" <mkp@....net>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@...e.com>,
	Joel Becker <jlbec@...lplan.org>,
	Eric Wong <normalperson@...t.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC] extending splice for copy offloading

On Mon, 2013-09-30 at 16:08 -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote:
> On 09/30/2013 04:00 PM, Bernd Schubert wrote:
> > pNFS, FhGFS, Lustre, Ceph, etc., all of them shall implement their own 
> > interface? And userspace needs to address all of them differently? 
> 
> The NFS and SCSI groups have each defined a standard which Zach's proposal 
> abstracts into a common user API.
> 
> Distributed file systems tend to be rather unique and do not have similar 
> standard bodies, but a lot of them could hide server specific implementations 
> under the current proposed interfaces.
> 
> What is not a good idea is to drag out the core, simple copy offload discussion 
> for another 5 years to pull in every odd use case :)

Agreed. The whole idea of a common system call interface should be to
allow us to abstract away the underlying storage and filesystem
architectures. If filesystem developers also want a way to expose that
underlying architecture to applications in order to enable further
optimisations, then that belongs in a separate discussion.

-- 
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer

NetApp
Trond.Myklebust@...app.com
www.netapp.com