On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 09:30:51PM -0600, Keith Busch wrote: >On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 03:13:41PM +0200, Bernd Schubert wrote: >> On 6/18/25 12:54, xiaobing.li wrote: >> > >> > Hi Bernd, >> > >> > Do you have any plans to add zero copy solution? We are interested in >> > FUSE's zero copy solution and conducting research in code. >> > If you have no plans in this regard for the time being, we intend to >> > submit our solution. >> >> Hi Xiobing, >> >> Keith (add to CC) did some work for that in ublk and also planned to >> work on that for fuse (or a colleague). Maybe Keith could >> give an update. > >I was initially asked to implement a similar solution that ublk uses for >zero-copy, but the requirements changed such that it won't work. The >ublk server can't directly access the zero-copy buffers. It can only >indirectly refer to it with an io_ring registered buffer index, which is >fine my ublk use case, but the fuse server that I was trying to >enable does in fact need to directly access that data. > Hi Keith, If it's convenient, could you tell us what your current application scenarios are and why you need to directly share memory between the application and fuse? We are also currently thinking about implementing zero-copy in the direction of directly sharing memory. Can you share your current ideas? Best regards -- Xiaobing Li
