[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YAbRz83CV2TyU3wT@google.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 12:34:23 +0000
From: Alessio Balsini <balsini@...roid.com>
To: Rokudo Yan <wu-yan@....com>
Cc: balsini@...roid.com, akailash@...gle.com, amir73il@...il.com,
axboe@...nel.dk, bergwolf@...il.com, duostefano93@...il.com,
dvander@...gle.com, fuse-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
gscrivan@...hat.com, jannh@...gle.com, kernel-team@...roid.com,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
maco@...roid.com, miklos@...redi.hu, palmer@...belt.com,
paullawrence@...gle.com, trapexit@...wn.link, zezeozue@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND V11 0/7] fuse: Add support for passthrough
read/write
On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 07:06:54PM +0800, Rokudo Yan wrote:
> on Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 5:27 PM Alessio Balsini <balsini@...roid.com> wrote:
> >
> > This is the 11th version of the series, rebased on top of v5.11-rc4.
> > Please find the changelog at the bottom of this cover letter.
> >
> > Add support for file system passthrough read/write of files when enabled
> > in userspace through the option FUSE_PASSTHROUGH.
> [...]
>
>
> Hi Allesio,
>
> Could you please add support for passthrough mmap too ?
> If the fuse file opened with passthrough actived, and then map (shared) to (another) process
> address space using mmap interface. As access the file with mmap will pass the vfs cache of fuse,
> but access the file with read/write will bypass the vfs cache of fuse, this may cause inconsistency.
> eg. the reader read the fuse file with mmap() and the writer modify the file with write(), the reader
> may not see the modification immediately since the writer bypass the vfs cache of fuse.
> Actually we have already meet an issue caused by the inconsistency after applying fuse passthrough
> scheme to our product.
>
> Thanks,
> yanwu.
Hi yanwu,
Thank you for your interest in this change.
FUSE passthrough for mmap is an extension that is already in my TODO
list, together with passthrough for directories.
For now I would prefer to keep this series minimal to make the review
process leaner and simpler.
I will start working on extending this series with new features and
addressing more corner cases as soon as these changes get merged, what
do you think?
Thanks,
Alessio
Powered by blists - more mailing lists