I don’t understand what you mean with the content disappearing when you mount the virtiofs on the guest - isn’t the mount empty when bound, untill the guest populates it?

Can you share what sync client+guest os you are using? if the client does “advanced” features like files on demand, then it might clash with virtiofs - this is where the details of which client/OS could be relevant, does it require local storage or support remote?

If guest os is windows, samba share it to the host. if guest os is linux, nfs will probably do. In both cases I would host the share on the client, unless the client specifically supports remote storage.

podman/docker seems to be the proper tool for you here, but a VM with the samba/nfs approach could be less hassle and less complicated, but somewhat bloaty. containers require some more tailoring but in theory is the right way to go.

Keep in mind that a screwup could be interpreted by the sync client as mass-deletes, so backups are important (as a rule of thumb, it always is, but especially for cloud hosted storage)

can I ask what level of experience/knowledge you have in this field? for fairness sake, I’m a sysadmin-ish role at work, having worked with remote terminal solutions, (optimizing remote desktop for use over satelitte and borderline dialup-speeds, if I ever again need to deep dive into the ICA-protocol it’ll be too soon, lol) have tinkered with building keyboards, hobby involves arduinos & going deep down linux confing rabbit holes. Also done some gamejams, without ever really finishing any prototyoes.

Also - I think the way I brought up the OS implementation bit was too poorly phrased and we’re too out of sync context wise for that to be a worth discussing at this point, but to answer your point, yes I am very versed in the subject, but I’m very curious ti see if there’s something I;ve missed:

If you have one of these keyboards, please hook it up to your favorite key-input listening tool, and share what you see. I’m especially curious to if the priority you mentioned is something you see sent along with the keypress-signals, or if it is handled by the firmware of the device.

And for the record, I really do likewhat these keyboards are doing, I think it’s about time we see some actuall progress in the field, and i sure as heck want those features in my next keyboard, but not seeing how this is unwelcome in competetive games at this point seems delusional to me. You’re very welcome to challenge me om that, but the only argument I can see having an impact now is if you got some raw techical proof that challenges the models I’ve mentioned.

they do in a way move the character on their own though, through emulating extra input events on behalf of the user.

without, these inputs are sent, one per human action: KEYDOWN=A, KEYDOWN=D with the same two keypresses: KEYDOWN=A, KEYDOWN=D+KEYUP=A

The problem is that these create input events on behalf of the user. forexample: When pressing A while still having D pressed, the keyboard sends a KEY_UP=D event even as the user is still pressing D.

As for your comparisom, lowering latency is something different, if anything it’s attempting to make the users actions registered more accurately.

Do note that without this kind of processing, the games already knows that D is still pressed while A is presses, and they decide how to act on it. Games handle this differently, a common one being both keys as “stand still”.

So we’re:

1. creating new input eventson behalf of the user
2. tricking the game to to avoid a state the devs have intended
3. resulting in a huge advantage for the player.

In my opinion this should be implemeted on a OS level for all to use, but I don’t struggle one bit to see how this is disruptive and a no-go in competitive games.