Re: [PATCH 2/7] Introduce target_fileio_set_fs

Doug Evans
2015-04-17T17:28:28Z

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).