Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2023 15:24:50 +0000 From: David Chisnall <theraven@freebsd.org> To: Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org> Cc: FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Is anyone working on VirtFS (FUSE over VirtIO) Message-ID: <A14C40DA-15EE-4777-B47F-2B342CE787EA@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <CAOtMX2gmc6L4H8L9107D84xofmd-idDgtVg8nkFkXPaPX1E8wg@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAOtMX2gmc6L4H8L9107D84xofmd-idDgtVg8nkFkXPaPX1E8wg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 31 Dec 2023, at 14:36, Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org> wrote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BFOn Sun, Dec 31, 2023 at 5:46=E2=80=AFAM David Chisnall <theraven@= freebsd.org> wrote: >>=20 >> Hi, >>=20 >> For running FreeBSD containers on macOS, I=E2=80=99m using dfr=E2=80=99s u= pdate of the 9pfs client code. This seems to work fine but Podman is in the= process of moving from using QEMU to using Apple=E2=80=99s native hyperviso= r frameworks. These don=E2=80=99t provide 9pfs servers and instead provide a= native VirtFS server (macOS now ships with a native VirtFS client, as does L= inux). >>=20 >> I believe the component bits for at least a functional implementation alr= eady exist (FUSE and a VirtIO transport), though I=E2=80=99m not sure about t= he parts for sharing buffer cache pages with the host. Is anyone working on= connecting these together? >>=20 >> David >=20 > Nobody that I know of. And while I understand the FUSE stuff well, > I'm shakier on VirtIO and the buffer cache. Do you think that this is > something that a GSoC student could accomplish? I=E2=80=99m not familiar enough with either part of the kernel to know. A co= mpetent student with two mentors each familiar with one of the parts might, b= ut this is increasingly strategically important. The newer cloud container-h= osting platforms are moving to lightweight VMs with VirtFS because it lets t= hem get the same sharing of container image contents between hosts but with f= ull kernel isolation. It would be easy to plug FreeBSD in as an alternative t= o Linux with this support. The VirtFS protocol is less well documented than I=E2=80=99d like, but it ap= pears to primarily be a different transport for FUSE messages and so may be q= uite easy to add if the FUSE code is sufficiently abstracted. David
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?A14C40DA-15EE-4777-B47F-2B342CE787EA>