Richard Sharpe realrichardsharpe at gmail.com
Wed Feb 15 09:42:39 MST 2012

On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 8:44 AM, David Disseldorp <ddiss at suse.de> wrote:
> Hi Richard,
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 06:51:58 -0800
> Richard Sharpe <realrichardsharpe at gmail.com> wrote:
>> With respect to an earlier question about whether or not FSCTLs need
>> to be done in the VFS, I would very much prefer that they are for a
>> couple of reasons:
> I'm all for having FSCTL handling in the VFS, my only concern is whether
> to make the hooks per individual IOCTL (my preference), via the single
> SMB_VFS_FSCTL hook currently only used by the smb1 server, or both.

[resent because I have not yet had my second cup of coffee]

If you make it per-FSCTL, then every time Microsoft adds a new FSCTL
we have to change the VFS interface, which means that it will not be
until Samba 9999.123 before we support them all :-) Not to mention the
explosion of VFS functions, when really we should make the VFS
correspond more closely to what Windows does (IRPs anyone?)

Right now, people cannot really do any FSCTL stuff in the VFS unless
they wait for Samba 3.7/4.0 or hack the main Samba code.

Richard Sharpe

More information about the samba-technical mailing list