Re: Re: [post LSFMM summary] where is fuse going?

[Horst Birthelmer <horst@birthelmer.de>]

On Tue, May 19, 2026 at 11:01:18AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Tue, 12 May 2026 at 22:23, Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> > As for fuse-iomap I'm not sure how to proceed
> 
> I will try to dedicate this week to reviewing fuse-iomap, hopefully
> without too many distractions.
> 
> >  -- in the long run I think
> > it would be cleaner if each file IO path (virtiofs dax, passthrough,
> > writeback_cache, iomap, and whatever we call the original one) had its
> > own file_operations.  But that would require us to refactor the common
> > code chunks from each file operation function into a bunch of smaller
> > functions, which I think would sharply increase the review backlog.
> 
> And so the plan is rather to basically start from scratch and do that
> form the beginning in fusex code.

In a probably misguided effort I have tried to make fusex useful for
what I nned it to be, so that at least I can try to implement compounds
for it. My conclusion is pretty much the same. I'm in favor of extra
file operations for the different 'flavors'.

> 
> Thanks,
> Miklos

My $0.02

Horst