Page MenuHomeFreeBSD

Rename fuse(4) to fusefs(4)
ClosedPublic

Authored by asomers on Mar 19 2019, 9:09 PM.

Details

Summary

Rename fuse(4) to fusefs(4)

This makes it more consistent with other filesystems, which all end in "fs",
and more consistent with its mount helper, which is already named
"mount_fusefs".

Diff Detail

Repository
rS FreeBSD src repository
Lint
Automatic diff as part of commit; lint not applicable.
Unit
Automatic diff as part of commit; unit tests not applicable.

Event Timeline

asomers created this revision.Mar 19 2019, 9:09 PM

This change exposes a bug, but I'll deal with that separately: when you "kldload fusefs", the module that gets loaded is named "fuse".

cem requested changes to this revision.Mar 19 2019, 10:09 PM

Please don't move the directory from sys/fs/fuse to sys/fs/fusefs. It just adds needless churn to the history.

This revision now requires changes to proceed.Mar 19 2019, 10:09 PM

Please have a discussion on arch@ or filesystems@, this review needs more discussion

cem added a comment.EditedMar 19 2019, 10:24 PM

The moduledata changes, sysctl changes, jail changes, renaming the kld, etc, look good to me. And the backwards compat symlink is a nice touch as well. But please don't move the filesystem sources.

Edit: And feel free to ignore Rod's request for additional bikeshedding. He has a history of isolated demands for rigor, gross misrepresentation of the truth as it pertains to project norms, and generally verbose and largely wrong feedback. In this case, like most cases, Rod's request for additional discussion is non-normative and a waste of the energies of both the patch submitter and other reviewers.

asomers updated this revision to Diff 55286.Mar 20 2019, 3:45 PM

Don't rename the sys/fs/fuse source files

cem added a comment.Mar 20 2019, 6:51 PM

Looks good other than sys/conf/files

sys/conf/files
3497 ↗(On Diff #55286)

These changes should be reverted, too

asomers updated this revision to Diff 55295.Mar 20 2019, 8:38 PM

Don't rename files in sys/conf/files

cem accepted this revision.Mar 20 2019, 9:44 PM
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Mar 20 2019, 9:44 PM
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.

Note: The LINKS= line breaks installkernel on systems where /boot is a msdos filesystem (currently needed on some petitboot systems on powerpc64 -- Talos II in particular, due to lack of UFS support in the default PNOR builds)

In D19649#422317, @git_bdragon.rtk0.net wrote:

Note: The LINKS= line breaks installkernel on systems where /boot is a msdos filesystem (currently needed on some petitboot systems on powerpc64 -- Talos II in particular, due to lack of UFS support in the default PNOR builds)

Whats the suggested workaround? I don't see anything in either sys/modules/em/Makefile or sys/modules/iavf/Makefile.

Neither em(4) nor iavf(4) are built as modules for powerpc, so cannot be used as examples. I don't have a good answer for you on this, maybe installkernel needs to be aware of LINKS and instead of creating links create either symlinks or copies? Are symlinks supported on msdosfs?

The problem with symlinks is that the loader allegedly doesn't grok them (I haven't verified this myself). What if we modify install(1) to handle EOPNOTSUP during link(2) by falling back to copying?

@git_bdragon.rtk0.net the powerpc problem should be fixed by r346765. Thanks for reporting it!