On Thu, Apr 16, 2026 at 06:24:02PM -0700, Joanne Koong wrote: > On Thu, Apr 16, 2026 at 1:14 PM Gregory Price <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I worry that this discussion is going to turn towards implementing a > > solution grounded in parsing arbitrary formats and how to store them, > > and that is completely detached from why FAMFS went this route in the > > first place. > > > > I question whether the actual issue here lies in the interface APPEARING > > more general purpose than it actually is - and therefore inviting > > attempts to over-genericize it. > > Would you mind clarifying this part? Are you saying that the interface > and logic is *already* generic and usable for other dax-backed > servers, just that everything is *named* famfs but it's not really > famfs specific?
Yes. If you just find/replace "famfs" with "dax_iomap", the structures here don't really seem all *that* crazy specific - they're just optimized for memory speeds instead of I/O. There is a circular nature to this - FAMFS figured it out first, in what we think is a reasonably generic way, but we can't know for sure. John, Dan, and Darrick have all proposed reasonable ways to hedge against the obvious fact the interface will not be perfect - which incorporates your BPF proposal along with a reasonably straight forward deprecation path that's not always possible in other arenas. All that while solving a real (and novel) problem. That's actually pretty damn cool. I would urge you to consider these proposals earnestly. ~Gregory
