On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 1:43 PM, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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. > If mmap sets vm_file to the underlying thing, wouldn't CRIU and anything else that uses map_files get confused? Or did you have something else in mind? --Andy -- 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
