On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 09:30:54PM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 12:46:11PM +0000, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > v3:
> > * Remove notifications virtqueue, it's unimplemented and can be added when
> > needed [Miklos]
> > * Add Security Considerations and Live Migration Considerations sections
> > [Michael]
> > v2:
> > * Clean up core virtio file system device spec
> > * Add DAX window
> >
> > These patches add the virtio file system device, which is based on Linux FUSE
> > but includes the DAX window extension. Similar to virtio-scsi, which
> > transports SCSI commands, virtio-fs transports FUSE requests and the protocol
> > documentation is not duplicated here.
>
> I think I prefer virtio-fuse as a name. Let's be a bit more
> specific: we might want to add more filesystem devices later on.
virtio-fs is not FUSE. Existing FUSE file system daemons cannot be
used.
It would be confusing to call it FUSE. The wire protocol is indeed
based on FUSE but from a user perspective it's a completely different
system.
The virtio-fs device extends the FUSE protocol with the
virtualization-specific DAX window (and the in-development shared
metadata versioning data structures that will be added to a future
spec).
Finally, users are likely to be confused and associate virtio-fuse with
outdated FUSE issues that have long since been solved. virtio-fs
performs really well and that's not something that people associate with
FUSE :-).
For these reasons I think we should continue to call it virtio-fs.
Stefan
