From: Luis Henriques <luis@igalia.com>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Cc: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>,
Bernd Schubert <bschubert@ddn.com>, Kevin Chen <kchen@ddn.com>,
Horst Birthelmer <hbirthelmer@ddn.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Matt Harvey <mharvey@jumptrading.com>,
kernel-dev@igalia.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 4/6] fuse: implementation of the FUSE_LOOKUP_HANDLE operation
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2026 11:57:31 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87zf6nov6c.fsf@wotan.olymp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJfpegszP+2XA=vADK4r09KU30BQd-r9sNu2Dog88yLG8iV7WQ@mail.gmail.com> (Miklos Szeredi's message of "Tue, 16 Dec 2025 11:39:54 +0100")
Hi Miklos,
On Tue, Dec 16 2025, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2025 at 19:12, Luis Henriques <luis@igalia.com> wrote:
>>
>> The implementation of LOOKUP_HANDLE modifies the LOOKUP operation to include
>> an extra inarg: the file handle for the parent directory (if it is
>> available). Also, because fuse_entry_out now has a extra variable size
>> struct (the actual handle), it also sets the out_argvar flag to true.
>
> How about adding this as an extension header (FUSE_EXT_HANDLE)? That
> would allow any operation to take a handle instead of a nodeid.
>
> Yeah, the infrastructure for adding extensions is inadequate, but I
> think the API is ready for this.
>
>> @@ -181,8 +182,24 @@ static void fuse_lookup_init(struct fuse_conn *fc, struct fuse_args *args,
>> args->in_args[2].size = 1;
>> args->in_args[2].value = "";
>> args->out_numargs = 1;
>> - args->out_args[0].size = sizeof(struct fuse_entry_out);
>> + args->out_args[0].size = sizeof(*outarg) + outarg->fh.size;
>> +
>> + if (fc->lookup_handle) {
>> + struct fuse_inode *fi = NULL;
>> +
>> + args->opcode = FUSE_LOOKUP_HANDLE;
>> + args->out_argvar = true;
>
> How about allocating variable length arguments on demand? That would
> allow getting rid of max_handle_size negotiation.
>
> args->out_var_alloc = true;
> args->out_args[1].size = MAX_HANDLE_SZ;
> args->out_args[1].value = NULL; /* Will be allocated to the actual size of the handle */
I've been trying to wrap my head around all the suggested changes, and
experimenting with a few options. Since there are some major things that
need to be modified, I'd like to confirm that I got them right:
1. In the old FUSE_LOOKUP, the args->in_args[0] will continue to use the
struct fuse_entry_out, which won't be changed and will continue to have
a static size.
2. FUSE_LOOKUP_HANDLE will add a new out_arg, which will be dynamically
allocated (using your suggestion: 'args->out_var_alloc'). This will be
a new struct fuse_entry_handle_out, similar to fuse_entry_out, but
replacing the struct fuse_attr by a struct fuse_statx, and adding the
file handle struct.
3. FUSE_LOOKUP_HANDLE will use the args->in_args[0] as an extension header
(FUSE_EXT_HANDLE). Note that other operations (e.g. those in function
create_new_entry()) will actually need to *add* an extra extension
header, as extension headers are already being used there.
This extension header will use the new struct fuse_entry_handle_out.
The above items seem to require some heavy changes on my current design.
That's why I'd like to make sure I got those right so that v3 is on the
right path.
Thanks in advance for any feedback!
Cheers,
--
Luís
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-09 11:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 86+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-12 18:12 [RFC PATCH v2 0/6] fuse: LOOKUP_HANDLE operation Luis Henriques
2025-12-12 18:12 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/6] fuse: store index of the variable length argument Luis Henriques
2025-12-12 18:12 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/6] fuse: move fuse_entry_out structs out of the stack Luis Henriques
2025-12-15 14:03 ` Bernd Schubert
2025-12-16 10:30 ` Luis Henriques
2025-12-12 18:12 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/6] fuse: initial infrastructure for FUSE_LOOKUP_HANDLE support Luis Henriques
2025-12-15 13:36 ` Bernd Schubert
2025-12-15 17:06 ` Amir Goldstein
2025-12-15 17:11 ` Bernd Schubert
2025-12-15 18:09 ` Amir Goldstein
2025-12-15 18:23 ` Bernd Schubert
2025-12-16 10:36 ` Luis Henriques
2025-12-16 10:19 ` Miklos Szeredi
2025-12-16 11:33 ` Luis Henriques
2025-12-16 11:46 ` Miklos Szeredi
2025-12-16 12:02 ` Luis Henriques
2025-12-12 18:12 ` [RFC PATCH v2 4/6] fuse: implementation of the FUSE_LOOKUP_HANDLE operation Luis Henriques
2025-12-15 17:39 ` Bernd Schubert
2025-12-16 11:48 ` Luis Henriques
2025-12-17 10:18 ` Amir Goldstein
2025-12-17 14:45 ` Luis Henriques
2025-12-17 15:02 ` Bernd Schubert
2025-12-17 16:53 ` Luis Henriques
2025-12-16 8:49 ` Joanne Koong
2025-12-16 8:54 ` Bernd Schubert
2025-12-17 0:32 ` Joanne Koong
2025-12-17 1:00 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-12-17 2:48 ` Joanne Koong
2025-12-17 9:38 ` Luis Henriques
2025-12-17 10:08 ` Miklos Szeredi
2025-12-17 16:17 ` Luis Henriques
2025-12-16 10:39 ` Miklos Szeredi
2025-12-16 10:51 ` Amir Goldstein
2025-12-16 11:07 ` Miklos Szeredi
2026-01-09 11:57 ` Luis Henriques [this message]
2026-01-09 12:38 ` Miklos Szeredi
2026-01-09 14:45 ` Luis Henriques
2026-01-09 14:56 ` Horst Birthelmer
2026-01-09 17:07 ` Luis Henriques
2026-01-12 7:43 ` Horst Birthelmer
2026-01-09 15:20 ` Miklos Szeredi
2026-01-09 15:03 ` Amir Goldstein
2026-01-09 15:37 ` Miklos Szeredi
2026-01-09 15:56 ` Bernd Schubert
2026-01-09 16:28 ` Miklos Szeredi
2026-01-09 17:16 ` Luis Henriques
2026-01-09 18:29 ` Amir Goldstein
2026-01-09 19:01 ` Miklos Szeredi
2026-01-09 19:28 ` Amir Goldstein
2026-01-09 19:12 ` Bernd Schubert
2026-01-09 19:55 ` Horst Birthelmer
2026-01-21 17:56 ` Luis Henriques
2026-01-21 18:16 ` Horst Birthelmer
2026-01-21 18:28 ` Bernd Schubert
2026-01-21 18:36 ` Horst Birthelmer
2026-01-21 18:49 ` Bernd Schubert
2026-01-21 19:00 ` Horst Birthelmer
2026-01-21 19:03 ` Bernd Schubert
2026-01-21 19:12 ` Horst Birthelmer
2026-01-22 9:52 ` Luis Henriques
2026-01-22 10:20 ` Horst Birthelmer
2026-01-22 10:35 ` Bernd Schubert
2026-01-22 10:53 ` Luis Henriques
2026-01-22 10:59 ` Horst Birthelmer
2026-01-22 11:25 ` Luis Henriques
2026-01-22 11:32 ` Bernd Schubert
2026-01-22 12:34 ` Horst Birthelmer
2025-12-12 18:12 ` [RFC PATCH v2 5/6] fuse: factor out NFS export related code Luis Henriques
2025-12-14 15:13 ` Amir Goldstein
2025-12-15 12:05 ` Luis Henriques
2025-12-12 18:12 ` [RFC PATCH v2 6/6] fuse: implementation of export_operations with FUSE_LOOKUP_HANDLE Luis Henriques
2025-12-16 10:58 ` Miklos Szeredi
2025-12-16 17:06 ` Luis Henriques
2025-12-16 20:12 ` Horst Birthelmer
2025-12-17 17:02 ` Luis Henriques
2025-12-17 18:02 ` Horst Birthelmer
2025-12-16 11:01 ` Amir Goldstein
2025-12-16 17:26 ` Luis Henriques
2025-12-14 17:02 ` [RFC PATCH v2 0/6] fuse: LOOKUP_HANDLE operation Askar Safin
2025-12-15 12:08 ` Luis Henriques
2025-12-16 0:33 ` Askar Safin
2025-12-16 17:36 ` Luis Henriques
2025-12-16 18:49 ` Bernd Schubert
2025-12-16 22:45 ` Askar Safin
2025-12-25 7:42 ` Askar Safin
2026-01-04 22:38 ` Askar Safin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87zf6nov6c.fsf@wotan.olymp \
--to=luis@igalia.com \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=bschubert@ddn.com \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=hbirthelmer@ddn.com \
--cc=kchen@ddn.com \
--cc=kernel-dev@igalia.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mharvey@jumptrading.com \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox