On Thu, 14 Aug 2025 at 15:36, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'm still hoping some common ground would benefit both interfaces. > Just not sure what it should be. Something very high level: - allow several map formats: say a plain one with a list of extents and a famfs one - allow several types of backing files: say regular and dax dev - querying maps has a common protocol, format of maps is opaque to this - maps are cached by a common facility - each type of mapping has a decoder module - each type of backing file has a module for handling I/O Does this make sense? This doesn't have to be implemented in one go, but for example GET_FMAP could be renamed to GET_READ_MAP with an added offset and size parameter. For famfs the offset/size would be set to zero/inf. I'd be content with that for now. Thanks, Miklos > > Thanks, > Miklos
