Re: [PATCH 5/7] FUSE: implement ioctl support

[Miklos Szeredi]

On Fri, 29 Aug 2008, Tejun Heo wrote:
> I first used 'server' for userland [FC]USE server but then I noticed
> there were places in FUSE they were referred as clients so now I use
> 'client' for those and call the app using the FUSE fs the 'caller'.
> What are the established terms?

Umm

 - userspace filesystem
 - filesystem daemon
 - filesystem process
 - server

Yes it's also a client of the fuse device, but that term is confusing.

> Anyways, doing it directly from the server (or is it client) opens up a
> lot of new possibilities to screw up and I'd really much prefer staying
> in similar ballpark with other operations.  Maybe we can restrict it to
> two stages (query size & transfer) and linear consecutive ranges but
> then again adding retry doesn't contribute too much to the complexity.
> Oh.. and BTW, the in-ioctl length coding is not used universally, so it
> can't be depended upon.

I know it's not universal, some horrors I've seen in the old wireless
interfaces.  The question is: do we want to support such "extended"
ioctls?  For exmaple, does OSS have non-conformant ioctls?

> >>  Also, what about containers?  How would it work then?
> > 
> > Dunno.  Isn't there some transformation of pids going on, so that the
> > global namespace can access pids in all containers but under a
> > different alias?  I do hope somethinig like this works, otherwise it's
> > not only fuse that will break.
> 
> I'm not sure either.  Any idea who we should be asking about it?

Serge Hallyn and Eric Biederman.

Miklos
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/