Add lower dir and handle to Linux VFS API#507
Merged
sanoursa merged 10 commits intomicrosoft:features/linuxprototypefrom Nov 15, 2018
Merged
Add lower dir and handle to Linux VFS API#507sanoursa merged 10 commits intomicrosoft:features/linuxprototypefrom
sanoursa merged 10 commits intomicrosoft:features/linuxprototypefrom
Conversation
Linux projfs interop
Linux mirror provider
The VFSforGit API, as defined for Windows and MacOS, does not support the use of an opaque handle as required to allow the Linux libprojfs library to track its event loop thread (and thus allow it to start and, later, stop the thread). Further, we need to pass the lower-level storageRoot directory path to libprojfs as it will be a stackable Linux filesystem which passes most or all operations through to the lower-level filesystem. The GVFS.Virtualization.FileSystem.FileSystemVirtualizer class has a Stop() method which returns void, so we follow that lead for MirrorProvider as well. And as we don't expect to return a value from the corresponding function in the Linux library either, we can also remove the return value from StopVirtualizationInstance() in the Linux PrjFSLib.
sanoursa
reviewed
Nov 14, 2018
MirrorProvider/MirrorProvider.Linux/LinuxFileSystemVirtualizer.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
As per discussion in microsoft#507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
Contributor
Author
|
I think this is up-to-date with all the changes proposed and discussed, @sanoursa; thanks for the keen-eyed review! |
jrbriggs
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 17, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
kivikakk
pushed a commit
to github/VFSForGit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 21, 2019
As per discussion in microsoft#507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
kivikakk
pushed a commit
to github/VFSForGit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 14, 2019
As per discussion in microsoft#507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
to github/VFSForGit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 29, 2019
As per discussion in microsoft#507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
jrbriggs
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 1, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
to github/VFSForGit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 9, 2019
As per discussion in microsoft#507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
to github/VFSForGit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 9, 2019
As per discussion in microsoft#507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
jrbriggs
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 9, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 10, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 12, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
kivikakk
pushed a commit
to github/VFSForGit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 16, 2019
As per discussion in microsoft#507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 16, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 16, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 18, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 21, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 21, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
kivikakk
pushed a commit
to github/VFSForGit
that referenced
this pull request
May 24, 2019
As per discussion in microsoft#507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 24, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 20, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 26, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 28, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 2, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 2, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 6, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 9, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
to github/VFSForGit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 13, 2019
As per discussion in microsoft#507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
to github/VFSForGit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 16, 2019
As per discussion in microsoft#507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 20, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 21, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
to github/VFSForGit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 21, 2019
As per discussion in microsoft#507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 23, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
to github/VFSForGit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 23, 2019
As per discussion in microsoft#507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 3, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 27, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 6, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 21, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 27, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 9, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 22, 2019
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 6, 2020
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 9, 2020
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 24, 2020
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 26, 2020
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
chrisd8088
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 29, 2020
As per discussion in #507, we can just keep the mountHandle local to the PrjFSLib.Linux.VirtualizationInstance and keep it out of the provider's filesystem virtualizer.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The VFSforGit API, as defined for Windows and MacOS, does not support the use of an opaque handle as required to allow the Linux libprojfs library to track its event loop thread (and thus allow it to start and, later, stop the thread).
Further, we need to pass the lower-level storageRoot directory path to libprojfs as it will be a stackable Linux filesystem which passes most or all operations through to the lower-level filesystem.
The GVFS.Virtualization.FileSystem.FileSystemVirtualizer class has a Stop() method which returns void, so we follow that lead for MirrorProvider as well.
And as we don't expect to return a value from the corresponding function in the Linux library either, we can also remove the return value from StopVirtualizationInstance() in the Linux PrjFSLib.