Re: [PATCH 2/7] Introduce target_fileio_set_fs

Gary Benson
2015-04-20T11:11:16Z

Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 04/17/2015 06:28 PM, Doug Evans wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 7:21 AM, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > On 04/17/2015 02:36 PM, Gary Benson wrote:
> > > > It was basically because the alternative was to add a parameter to
> > > > target_filesystem_is_local and target_fileio_{open,readlink,unlink}
> > > > (and all their target vector implementations) to pass around whatever
> > > > inferior you were talking about. You'd also have to make a lot more
> > > > changes to the remote protocol: either vFile:{open,unlink,readlink}
> > > > would need an extra argument (indicated with qSupported) or you'd need
> > > > new "fs" versions of each packet. Both Pedro and I thought that was
> > > > ugly.
> > >
> > > Right, this way mirrors what's done at the posix/system call level too,
> > > and if some other systems needs something different for selecting
> > > a "filesystem namespace", there's a single method/packet to change.
> >
> > Fair enough.
> > All I would ask is that this get pushed down as far as possible in the
> > call stack.
> >
> > E.g., while I wouldn't suggest massive changes to the remote protocol
> > (regardless of how desperately IWBN), IWBN that layers above that
> > follow good programming practices (avoiding using global state
> > wherever possible/reasonable).
>
> Fair enough as well. I'm fine with adding explicit arguments
> on the layers above, leaving the packet as is.

Ok, I'll make that change.

Cheers,
Gary

--