Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCHSET] FUSE: extend FUSE to support more operations | From | Miklos Szeredi <> | Date | Wed, 12 Nov 2008 11:00:56 +0100 |
| |
On Wed, 12 Nov 2008, Tejun Heo wrote: > > Comments about the others: > > > > 0002-FUSE-pass-nonblock-flag-to-client.patch > > > > this is not needed, f_flags are already passed to userspace for read > > and write. > > Hmmm... I'll try to find out whether I can use f_flags. There was > something that prevented it from working properly. I'll dig.
Support for this was missing from libfuse, but now I fixed that in the CVS version.
> > 0004-FUSE-implement-direct-lseek-support.patch > > > > this is trickier to get the interface right I think. If we want to > > allow filesystems to implement a custom lseek, then we also want them > > to keep track of the file position, which means we must differentiate > > between a write(2) and a pwrite(2) and similarly for reads. AFAICS > > this isn't needed for CUSE so we can leave this to later. > > Read/write already passes @offset, so the only thing required is an > extra flag there. I mainly wanted a way for a CUSE server to veto lseek > with proper error and still think it's better to have this as we don't > really know what wacky users are out there. What do you think about an > extra flag?
OK, but that's gonna involve a fair bit of API churn, and I'm not sure it's worth it at this stage. If this is not needed for the OSS emulation, I think we should postpone it.
Thanks, Miklos
| |