On Tue, 5 Aug 2014 22:48:11 +0200
<u-codalist-z149_at_aetey.se> wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 05, 2014 at 10:51:53AM -0500, Andrew Deason wrote:
> > > Does FUSE provide a suitable counterpart to the pioctl?
> > 
> > It should be possible to implement pioctls using ioctls or xattrs
> > (both of which FUSE supports, iirc). If I were to ever spend more
> > time on the openafs FUSE implementation, that is the route I assumed
> > I would take to get pioctl support. (I think I talked a little about
> > this during some
> 
> This sounds good. I have possibly a too pessimistic view on pioctls
> and on FUSE.
> 
> > presentation; I can find a link if anyone wants.)
> 
> Yes I would be interested to read if you have a link at hand.

Sorry that took a little while; I had to go find this again:
<http://webcast.desy.de/Wowza1/content/AFS_Kerberos2011/Talk06.flv>
the part that's most relevant to this starts at around 7:45. I don't
know if there's anything in there that you don't already know, though :)

There are a couple of mailing list threads related to this, too:
<http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.openafs.general/31017>
and
<http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.openafs.devel/10201>

I don't think any real work or changes have occurred since then. In
retrospect watching that again, my first impression is that using a unix
domain socket using some marshalling mechanism would be easiest. rmtsys,
if you have anything like that. I'm also not really opposed to using
plain ioctls like I apparently was before, but it's been much longer
since I ever looked at anything in this area.

-- 
Andrew Deason
adeason_at_sinenomine.net