Re: [PATCH V10 00/10] famfs: port into fuse

Joanne Koong
2026-04-17T19:35:27Z

On Fri, Apr 17, 2026 at 1:04 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> This is the first mail without annoying and pointless full quotes,
> so chiming in here. Sorry if I missed something important in all the
> noise.
>
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2026 at 03:19:36PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > On Fri, 10 Apr 2026 at 21:44, Joanne Koong <joannelkoong@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Overall, my intention with bringing this up is just to make sure we're
> > > at least aware of this alternative before anything is merged and
> > > permanent. If Miklos and you think we should land this series, then
> > > I'm on board with that.
> >
> > TBH, I'd prefer not to add the famfs specific mapping interface if not
> > absolutely necessary.
>
> Yes, fuse needing support for a specific file systems sounds like a
> design mistake.
>
> >This was the main sticking point originally,
> > but there seemed to be no better alternative.
> >
> > However with the bpf approach this would be gone, which is great.
>
> So what is this bpf magic actually trying to solve?

It is trying to avoid having famfs-specific implementation details
hardcoded permanently into fuse's uapi and kernel code. I really like
your suggestion of adding generic stride/offset multi-device support
to fs/iomap. That is a much better solution than bpf.

Thanks,
Joanne

>