On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Nikhilesh Reddy <reddyn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> FUSE allows users to implement extensions to filesystems ..such as enforcing policy or permissions without having to modify the kernel or maintain the policy in the kernel.
>
> One such example is what was quoted by Antonio above ..
> Another example is a fuse based filesystem that tries to enforce additional permissions on a FAT based mount point.
>
> From what i could google there are many FUSE based filesystems out there that do things during the open call but simply pass through the read/and write I/O calls to the local "lower" filesystem where they actually store the data.
So I think these are valid use-cases, and I just think that they should
(a) be documented in the commit message as explanations of why people
would do this/
(b) not be called "stacked", because that tends to have some other
connotations to fs people.
I don't know what a better term would be, but you yourself used "pass
through". Maybe that (perhaps together with a clarification that it's
a per-file thing) might work fine.
Btw, why is mmap not passed through? That sounds fairly simple and
straightforward, I'm not seeing why it would be missing.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
