From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Mar 2 17:45:53 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from apollo.backplane.com (apollo.backplane.com [216.240.41.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A5BD37BD7B for ; Thu, 2 Mar 2000 17:45:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com) Received: (from dillon@localhost) by apollo.backplane.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) id RAA04414; Thu, 2 Mar 2000 17:45:44 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dillon) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 17:45:44 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Dillon Message-Id: <200003030145.RAA04414@apollo.backplane.com> To: Aaron Smith Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: user-space filesystems References: <20000302163318.F7995@gelatinous.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG :hello, : :i've done some searching and i've seen discussion of userland fs :before. has there been any progress in the user-space filesystem area? i :have a nifty project and i would like to avoid using loopback NFS; have we :got anything akin to linux's userfs yet? : :if freebsd doesn't have this capability, where would a good place to start :be on loopback NFS? maybe somebody has a loopback NFS skeleton i can start :from? : :any pointers/discussion would be helpful. : :aaron : :here's one of the messages that made me say "yeah, like that!": : :> Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 14:57:45 -0400 :> From: "David E. Cross" :> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org :> Subject: USFS (User Space File System) :> Message-ID: <199907171857.OAA81681@cs.rpi.edu> :> :> I am looking at a project that will require a user based process to :> interact with the system as if it were a filesystem. The traditional way I :> have seen this done is as the system NFS mounting itself (ala AMD). I :> would really like a more clean approach to this. What I am interested in :... :> :> I have a number of questions on more specific ideas (like caching, :> inode/vnode interaction, etc). But I am just feeling arround for what :> people think about this. Any ideas/comments? It would take a lot of work to be able to do this and make it secure and safe. Essentially the VOP_ calls would have to be turned into userland messages or RPCs, and the kernel would have to audit the entire contents of the response as well as implement timeouts and deal with other issues such as when the userspace fs process seg faults or is killed. -Matt Matthew Dillon To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message