From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21A03C48BE5 for ; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 18:37:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9599461375 for ; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 18:37:18 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 9599461375 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:45992 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ltaPd-0005CN-CM for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 14:37:17 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41652) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ltaOH-0003lw-It for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 14:35:54 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:41306) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ltaOE-00088D-Qi for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 14:35:52 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1623868549; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=SoNyLmrdCvPG+i0ScXdVn3sSf6fN+3mF6O8CHFmjLkY=; b=F2Dgy0Cu45q0xTn4FT0FdvgOYZ3exv1E9P/Kl+NjIhky947z/SuKA6kD0U5SWWED+xrqnX WsdqYxkeyZkDdraDsltPiqmHsPq/zAOrbuD6uGKtCiYVpCzwlnQ5Hi0oTyn0OS2LGnD4bb jm7MqImFufkbSuTorTaqIu6vyZnADxQ= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-578-2B66SC0RO7SR30x4haXhIA-1; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 14:35:39 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 2B66SC0RO7SR30x4haXhIA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3AE58100C67D; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 18:35:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from work-vm (ovpn-115-42.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.115.42]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 15FE460622; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 18:35:29 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2021 19:35:26 +0100 From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" To: Stefan Hajnoczi Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 26/26] virtiofsd: Ask qemu to drop CAP_FSETID if client asked for it Message-ID: References: <20210506160223.GA277745@redhat.com> <20210510152324.GB150402@horse> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/2.0.7 (2021-05-04) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.13 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=dgilbert@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.133.124; envelope-from=dgilbert@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -29 X-Spam_score: -3.0 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.0 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.199, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: virtio-fs@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Vivek Goyal , groug@kaod.org Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" * Stefan Hajnoczi (stefanha@redhat.com) wrote: > On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 01:36:10PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > * Stefan Hajnoczi (stefanha@redhat.com) wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 04:29:42PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > > > * Dr. David Alan Gilbert (dgilbert@redhat.com) wrote: > > > > > * Stefan Hajnoczi (stefanha@redhat.com) wrote: > > > > + uint64_t addr; /* In the bus address of the device */ > > > > > > Please check the spec for preferred terminology. "bus address" isn't > > > used in the spec, so there's probably another term for it. > > > > I'm not seeing anything useful in the virtio spec; it mostly talks about > > guest physical addresses; it does say 'bus addresses' in the definition > > of 'VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM' . > > I meant the docs/interop/vhost-user.rst spec. I think they use the phrase 'guest address' so I've changed that to: uint64_t guest_addr; Elsewhere in the vhost-user.rst it says: When the ``VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM`` feature has not been negotiated: * Guest addresses map to the vhost memory region containing that guest address. When the ``VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM`` feature has been negotiated: * Guest addresses are also called I/O virtual addresses (IOVAs). They are translated to user addresses via the IOTLB. > Stefan -- Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2021 19:35:26 +0100 From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" Message-ID: References: <20210506160223.GA277745@redhat.com> <20210510152324.GB150402@horse> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH v3 26/26] virtiofsd: Ask qemu to drop CAP_FSETID if client asked for it List-Id: Development discussions about virtio-fs List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Stefan Hajnoczi Cc: virtio-fs@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Vivek Goyal * Stefan Hajnoczi (stefanha@redhat.com) wrote: > On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 01:36:10PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > * Stefan Hajnoczi (stefanha@redhat.com) wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 04:29:42PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > > > * Dr. David Alan Gilbert (dgilbert@redhat.com) wrote: > > > > > * Stefan Hajnoczi (stefanha@redhat.com) wrote: > > > > + uint64_t addr; /* In the bus address of the device */ > > > > > > Please check the spec for preferred terminology. "bus address" isn't > > > used in the spec, so there's probably another term for it. > > > > I'm not seeing anything useful in the virtio spec; it mostly talks about > > guest physical addresses; it does say 'bus addresses' in the definition > > of 'VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM' . > > I meant the docs/interop/vhost-user.rst spec. I think they use the phrase 'guest address' so I've changed that to: uint64_t guest_addr; Elsewhere in the vhost-user.rst it says: When the ``VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM`` feature has not been negotiated: * Guest addresses map to the vhost memory region containing that guest address. When the ``VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM`` feature has been negotiated: * Guest addresses are also called I/O virtual addresses (IOVAs). They are translated to user addresses via the IOTLB. > Stefan -- Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK