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

Amir Goldstein
2026-04-17T09:07:12Z

On Fri, Apr 17, 2026 at 8:46 AM Gregory Price <gourry@gourry.net> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2026 at 06:24:02PM -0700, Joanne Koong wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 16, 2026 at 1:14 PM Gregory Price <gourry@gourry.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > I worry that this discussion is going to turn towards implementing a
> > > solution grounded in parsing arbitrary formats and how to store them,
> > > and that is completely detached from why FAMFS went this route in the
> > > first place.
> > >
> > > I question whether the actual issue here lies in the interface APPEARING
> > > more general purpose than it actually is - and therefore inviting
> > > attempts to over-genericize it.
> >
> > Would you mind clarifying this part? Are you saying that the interface
> > and logic is *already* generic and usable for other dax-backed
> > servers, just that everything is *named* famfs but it's not really
> > famfs specific?
>
> Yes.
>
> If you just find/replace "famfs" with "dax_iomap", the structures
> here don't really seem all *that* crazy specific - they're just
> optimized for memory speeds instead of I/O.
>
> There is a circular nature to this - FAMFS figured it out first, in
> what we think is a reasonably generic way, but we can't know for sure.
>
> John, Dan, and Darrick have all proposed reasonable ways to hedge
> against the obvious fact the interface will not be perfect - which
> incorporates your BPF proposal along with a reasonably straight forward
> deprecation path that's not always possible in other arenas.
>
> All that while solving a real (and novel) problem.
>
> That's actually pretty damn cool.
>
> I would urge you to consider these proposals earnestly.
>

Apart from your suggestion to replace s/famfs/dax_iomap/
the fact that this logic sits in fs/fuse/famfs.c (or fuse/dax_iomap.c)
is the other big architecture issue.

If this logic was to be placed in fs/iomap/ as Christoph suggested,
I think the rest of the UAPI issues could be sorted out.

In any case, considering the sheer amount of discussion on this thread
I have scheduled a cross-track FS+MM+IO for Famfs and DAX iomap.

I wasn't going to include Storage people at first, but since Christoph
mentioned that stride/offset iomap could be useful for block iomap,
I included them as well.

Thanks,
Amir.