[lkml]   [2008]   [Nov]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCHSET] FUSE: extend FUSE to support more operations
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.


 \ /
  Last update: 2008-11-12 11:03    [W:0.149 / U:2.332 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site