#fuse #filesystem


A higher-level FUSE filesystem library with multi-threading and inode->path translation

12 releases

0.5.1 Aug 17, 2020
0.5.0 May 11, 2019
0.4.4 Feb 18, 2018
0.4.3 Nov 10, 2017
0.3.0 Feb 1, 2017

#159 in Filesystem

Download history 86/week @ 2021-08-08 66/week @ 2021-08-15 214/week @ 2021-08-22 50/week @ 2021-08-29 42/week @ 2021-09-05 337/week @ 2021-09-12 34/week @ 2021-09-19 15/week @ 2021-09-26 12/week @ 2021-10-03 40/week @ 2021-10-10 305/week @ 2021-10-17 38/week @ 2021-10-24 29/week @ 2021-10-31 30/week @ 2021-11-07 17/week @ 2021-11-14 50/week @ 2021-11-21

347 downloads per month
Used in 3 crates




Build Status Crates.io


This code is a wrapper on top of the Rust FUSE crate with the following additions:

  • Dispatch system calls on multiple threads, so that e.g. I/O doesn't block directory listing.
  • Translate inodes into paths, to simplify filesystem implementation.

The rust-fuse crate provides a minimal, low-level access to the FUSE kernel API, whereas this crate is more high-level, like the FUSE C API.

It includes a sample filesystem that uses the crate to pass all system calls through to another filesystem at any arbitrary path.

This is a work-in-progress. Bug reports, pull requests, and other feedback are welcome!

Some random notes on the implementation:

  • The trait that filesystems will implement is called FilesystemMT, and instead of the FUSE crate's convention of having methods return void and including a "reply" parameter, the methods return their values. This feels more idiomatic to me. They also take &Path arguments instead of inode numbers.
  • Currently, only the following calls are dispatched to other threads:
    • read
    • write
    • flush
    • fsync
  • Other calls run synchronously on the main thread because either it is expected that they will complete quickly and/or they require mutating internal state of the InodeTranslator and I want to avoid needing locking in there.
  • The inode/path translation is always done on the main thread.
  • It might be a good idea to limit the number of concurrent read and write operations in flight. I'm not sure yet how many outstanding read/write requests FUSE will issue though, so it might be a non-issue.


~12K SLoC