Re: [PATCHSET] FUSE: extend FUSE to support more operations

From: Miklos Szeredi
Date: Thu Nov 13 2008 - 09:48:36 EST


On Thu, 13 Nov 2008, Tejun Heo wrote:
> poll/select/epoll can poll on massive number of files. I don't think
> it's wise to have that many outstanding requests. FUSE currently uses
> linear list to match replies to requests and libfuse will consume one
> thread per each poll if implemented like other requests. It can be made
> asynchronous from libfuse tho.
>
> I kind of like the original implementation tho. The f_ops->poll
> interface is designed to be used like ->poll returning events if
> available immediately and queue for later notification as necessary.
> Notification is asynchronous and can be spurious (this actually comes
> pretty handy for low level implementation). When notified, upper layer
> queries the same way using ->poll. This is quite convenient for low
> level implementation as the actual logic of poll can live in ->poll
> proper while notifications can be scattered around places where events
> can occur.

Yes, that kind of interface is nice for f_ops->poll, and for libfuse.

But for the kernel interface it's inefficient. A wake up event is 3
context switches instead of one. And that's inherent in the interface
itself for no good reason.

Also there's again the question of userspace filesystem messing with
the caller: your original implementation allows the userspace
filesystem to block f_ops->poll() forever, which really isn't what
poll/select is about.

So I'd still argue for the simple POLL-request/POLL-notify protocol on
the kernel API, and possibly have the async notification similar to
the kernel interface on the library API.

Implementation wise I don't care all that much, but I'd actually
prefer if it was implemented using the traditional request/reply thing
and optimized (possibly later) to find requests in a more efficient
way than searching the linear list, which would benefit not just poll
but all requests.

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/