Re: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 6/6] fuse: implementation of export_operations with FUSE_LOOKUP_HANDLE

[Horst Birthelmer]

On Tue, Dec 16, 2025 at 05:06:25PM +0000, Luis Henriques wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 16 2025, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
...
> >
> > I think it should be either
> >
> >   - encode nodeid + generation (backward compatibility),
> >
> >   - or encode file handle for servers that support it
> >
> > but not both.
> 
> OK, in fact v1 was trying to do something like that, by defining the
> handle with this:
> 
> struct fuse_inode_handle {
> 	u32 type;
> 	union {
> 		struct {
> 			u64 nodeid;
> 			u32 generation;
> 		};
> 		struct fuse_file_handle fh;
> 	};
> };
> 
> (The 'type' is likely to be useless, as we know if the server supports fh
> or not.)
> 
> > Which means that fuse_iget() must be able to search the cache based on
> > the handle as well, but that should not be too difficult to implement
> > (need to hash the file handle).
> 
> Right, I didn't got that far in v1.  I'll see what I can come up to.
> Doing memcmp()s would definitely be too expensive, so using hashes is the
> only way I guess.
> 
Please excuse my ignorance, but why would memcmp() be too expensive for a proof of concept?
Inode handles are limited and the cache is somewhat limited.

Cheers,
Horst