* Michael S. Tsirkin (m...@redhat.com) wrote: > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 06:50:21PM +0000, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > Hi, > > There's been quite a bit of discussion about where virtiofsd, our > > implemenation of a virtiofs daemon, should live. I'd like to get > > this settled now, because I'd like to tidy it up for the next > > qemu cycle. > > > > For reference it's based on qemu's livhost-user+chunks of libfuse. > > It can't live in libfuse because we change enough of the library > > to break their ABI. > > Generally there could be some ifdefs that allow one to > build libfuse-host or whatever from the same source. > I am guessing the big reason this doesn't fly is that > libfuse is not actively developed anymore.
libfuse is certainly taking patches; so it's not dead. However, the changes for the transport are quite invasive, and it doesn't feel right to impose them on it. We've pushed up small fixes/changes etc - but not things that are big intrusive lumps for our use. > Given that, the main remaining part is libvhost-user, > and it's less work to use than to duplicate that. > That kind of dictates being in qemu. > > > It's C, and we've got ~100 patches - which > > we can split into about 3 chunks. > > > > Some suggestions so far: > > a) In contrib > > This is my current working assumption; the main objection is it's > > a bit big and pulls in a chunk of libfuse. > > b) In a submodule > > > > c) Just separate > > > > Your suggestions/ideas please. My preference is (a). > > > > Dave > > > My preference is close to a, and maybe to avoid confusion we should have > a new top-level directory for "separate daemons qemu invokes, and need > to be built together with qemu". libvhost-user would have to move there, > too. "modules"? "modules" feels too close to "plugins" to my mind. Dave > > > > > -- > > Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilb...@redhat.com / Manchester, UK > > > -- Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilb...@redhat.com / Manchester, UK
