[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87pl8ed5l3.fsf@wotan.olymp>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2025 11:33:12 +0000
From: Luis Henriques <luis@...lia.com>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>, "Darrick J. Wong"
<djwong@...nel.org>, Bernd Schubert <bschubert@....com>, Kevin Chen
<kchen@....com>, Horst Birthelmer <hbirthelmer@....com>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Matt
Harvey <mharvey@...ptrading.com>, kernel-dev@...lia.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/6] fuse: initial infrastructure for
FUSE_LOOKUP_HANDLE support
On Tue, Dec 16 2025, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2025 at 19:12, Luis Henriques <luis@...lia.com> wrote:
>>
>> This patch adds the initial infrastructure to implement the LOOKUP_HANDLE
>> operation. It simply defines the new operation and the extra fuse_init_out
>> field to set the maximum handle size.
>
> Since we are introducing a new op, I'd consider switching to
> fuse_statx for the attributes.
So, just to clarify: you're suggesting that the maximum handle size should
instead be set using statx. Which means that the first time the client
(kernel) needs to use this value it would emit a FUSE_STATX, and cache
that value for future use. IIUC, this would also require a new mask
(STATX_MAX_HANDLE_SZ) to be added. Did I got it right?
What would be the advantages of using statx? Keeping the unused bytes in
struct fuse_init_out untouched?
Cheers,
--
Luís
Powered by blists - more mailing lists