Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 21:34:38 -0700
From: "Jeff V. Merkey" <jmerkey@vger.timpanogas.org>
To: Mark Richards <richard@ecf.utoronto.ca>
Cc: Linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jmerkey@timpanogas.org
Subject: Re: Multiplexing filesystem
Message-ID: <20011126213438.A1254@vger.timpanogas.org>
In-Reply-To: <3C030FB4.C3303BE4@ecf.utoronto.ca>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <3C030FB4.C3303BE4@ecf.utoronto.ca>; from richard@ecf.utoronto.ca on Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 10:59:48PM -0500
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org


You may want to look at FS filter drivers in Windows 2000 as a good model
for something like this.  Intermezzo also seems to do something a lot
like this, but not to the Windows 2000 degree.  W2K has something 
called a filter driver interface, which is super handy for 
encryption, and going remote.  

The filter driver idea is pretty cool, and MS has been able to 
implement some pretty cool stuff with it, like snap in virus 
detection software across different file systems.  They also
did something called a "mini-port" file system, which was a
filter driver on top of their very complex IFS interface which
made writing remote file systems, like network clients, as lot 
easier and faster. 

The disadvantage to their approach was that several new 
and nasty "viruses" showed up as filter drivers and used 
this interface to trash file systems. 

Food for thought.

:-)

Jeff  


On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 10:59:48PM -0500, Mark Richards wrote:
> Quick question, which I suspect has a long answer.
> 
> I would like to write a multiplexing filesystem.  The idea is as follows:
> 
> The filesystem would ideally wrap another filesystem, such as nfs or smbfs or
> ext2.  Most operations would just be passed to the native fs call.  However, for
> some files, selectable at run time by some control singal, would actually reside
> on another file system.  The other filesystem would have to be mounted.
> 
> The idea is for a version controlling filesystem.  The server would be a network
> server (hence the desire to wrap nfs) which presents a 'view' of the source
> code.  When the user reserves a file for editing, the file is copied to the
> local disk.  From that point on, the local file is referred to until the user
> commits the change or unreserves the file.  Ideally, the local copy of the file
> could be on any file system, not one that is necessarily local.  And this has to
> be totally transparent to the user, except for the step where the user
> 'reserves' the file.
> 
> I've thought about two ways to do this.  One is to wrap the 'versioning' file
> system with a multiplexor that checks fs calls to see if they are referring to a
> file that is on a different fs.  The other approach is to intercept calls to the
> VFS to do the same trick.
> 
> I'm new to the whole filesystem-coding thing, so bear with me if what i've just
> said makes no sense.  So, my question (I guess it wasn't quick after all) is:
> Can it be done, and are either of my two approaches feasible?  Any suggestions
> or tips?
> 
> Thanks,
> Mark Richards
> 
> PS please CC me if possible.
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/