(Illustration by Gaich Muramatsu)
On Tue, 5 Aug 2014 22:48:11 +0200 <u-codalist-z149_at_aetey.se> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 05, 2014 at 10:51:53AM -0500, Andrew Deason wrote: > > > Does FUSE provide a suitable counterpart to the pioctl? > > > > It should be possible to implement pioctls using ioctls or xattrs > > (both of which FUSE supports, iirc). If I were to ever spend more > > time on the openafs FUSE implementation, that is the route I assumed > > I would take to get pioctl support. (I think I talked a little about > > this during some > > This sounds good. I have possibly a too pessimistic view on pioctls > and on FUSE. > > > presentation; I can find a link if anyone wants.) > > Yes I would be interested to read if you have a link at hand. Sorry that took a little while; I had to go find this again: <http://webcast.desy.de/Wowza1/content/AFS_Kerberos2011/Talk06.flv> the part that's most relevant to this starts at around 7:45. I don't know if there's anything in there that you don't already know, though :) There are a couple of mailing list threads related to this, too: <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.openafs.general/31017> and <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.openafs.devel/10201> I don't think any real work or changes have occurred since then. In retrospect watching that again, my first impression is that using a unix domain socket using some marshalling mechanism would be easiest. rmtsys, if you have anything like that. I'm also not really opposed to using plain ioctls like I apparently was before, but it's been much longer since I ever looked at anything in this area. -- Andrew Deason adeason_at_sinenomine.netReceived on 2014-08-20 00:01:58