On 01.04.25 22:24, Eric Blake wrote:
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 05:06:55PM +0100, Hanna Czenczek wrote:
We probably want to support larger write sizes than just 4k; 64k seems
nice. However, we cannot read partial requests from the FUSE FD, we
always have to read requests in full; so our read buffe
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 05:06:55PM +0100, Hanna Czenczek wrote:
> We probably want to support larger write sizes than just 4k; 64k seems
> nice. However, we cannot read partial requests from the FUSE FD, we
> always have to read requests in full; so our read buffer must be large
> enough to accomm
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 05:06:55PM +0100, Hanna Czenczek wrote:
> We probably want to support larger write sizes than just 4k; 64k seems
> nice. However, we cannot read partial requests from the FUSE FD, we
> always have to read requests in full; so our read buffer must be large
> enough to accomm
We probably want to support larger write sizes than just 4k; 64k seems
nice. However, we cannot read partial requests from the FUSE FD, we
always have to read requests in full; so our read buffer must be large
enough to accommodate potential 64k writes if we want to support that.
Always allocatin
