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 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BFE5C433FE for ; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 13:28:03 +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 2B3FA61251 for ; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 13:28:03 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 2B3FA61251 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:36496 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mXkUE-00045q-Db for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 05 Oct 2021 09:28:02 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:35678) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mXkSs-0002xN-9s for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 05 Oct 2021 09:26:38 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:34051) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mXkSn-0003w4-LT for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 05 Oct 2021 09:26:37 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1633440391; 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=kHzaR/31M+Zj7RReyuyicYqWAB3CisgeWbu98qxzIGw=; b=RwjcLUQHPgC2Ds3Cjdz53TyX75/dajZG5eam51wGnkyD7BuBz3i809PhTQa0uhiSrpa/PM UeoBAd/gnAblrKE0NjvwKOlgDd5184RXMLgJScf7xqlxdiwPG5/SvbgXiSWCBLUP18U6PP /zkncx1UXdvSv+wj7HgtcDPpQmgjm8U= 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-273-P9I_xAK-Og6ZT5Ab5mrcxA-1; Tue, 05 Oct 2021 09:26:30 -0400 X-MC-Unique: P9I_xAK-Og6ZT5Ab5mrcxA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 73F8A19253C0; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 13:26:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from horse.redhat.com (unknown [10.22.9.147]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C90121042AA1; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 13:26:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: by horse.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 10451) id 642C6220BDB; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 09:26:14 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2021 09:26:14 -0400 From: Vivek Goyal To: Stefan Hajnoczi Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/13] virtiofsd: Implement blocking posix locks Message-ID: References: <20210930153037.1194279-1-vgoyal@redhat.com> <20210930153037.1194279-13-vgoyal@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.22 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=vgoyal@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=216.205.24.124; envelope-from=vgoyal@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -28 X-Spam_score: -2.9 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.066, 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_H2=-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: miklos@szeredi.hu, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, iangelak@redhat.com, dgilbert@redhat.com, virtio-fs@redhat.com, jaggel@bu.edu Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 04:07:04PM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 11:30:36AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > As of now we don't support fcntl(F_SETLKW) and if we see one, we return > > -EOPNOTSUPP. > > > > Change that by accepting these requests and returning a reply > > immediately asking caller to wait. Once lock is available, send a > > notification to the waiter indicating lock is available. > > > > In response to lock request, we are returning error value as "1", which > > signals to client to queue the lock request internally and later client > > will get a notification which will signal lock is taken (or error). And > > then fuse client should wake up the guest process. > > > > Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal > > Signed-off-by: Ioannis Angelakopoulos > > --- > > tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++- > > tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.h | 26 ++++++++++++ > > tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++--- > > tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > > 4 files changed, 167 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c b/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c > > index e4679c73ab..2e7f4b786d 100644 > > --- a/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c > > +++ b/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c > > @@ -179,8 +179,8 @@ int fuse_send_reply_iov_nofree(fuse_req_t req, int error, struct iovec *iov, > > .unique = req->unique, > > .error = error, > > }; > > - > > - if (error <= -1000 || error > 0) { > > + /* error = 1 has been used to signal client to wait for notificaiton */ > > s/notificaiton/notification/ Will fix. I have made too many spelling mistakes. :-( > > > + if (error <= -1000 || error > 1) { > > fuse_log(FUSE_LOG_ERR, "fuse: bad error value: %i\n", error); > > out.error = -ERANGE; > > } > > @@ -290,6 +290,11 @@ int fuse_reply_err(fuse_req_t req, int err) > > return send_reply(req, -err, NULL, 0); > > } > > > > +int fuse_reply_wait(fuse_req_t req) > > +{ > > + return send_reply(req, 1, NULL, 0); > > +} > > + > > void fuse_reply_none(fuse_req_t req) > > { > > fuse_free_req(req); > > @@ -2165,6 +2170,34 @@ static void do_destroy(fuse_req_t req, fuse_ino_t nodeid, > > send_reply_ok(req, NULL, 0); > > } > > > > +static int send_notify_iov(struct fuse_session *se, int notify_code, > > + struct iovec *iov, int count) > > +{ > > + struct fuse_out_header out; > > + if (!se->got_init) { > > + return -ENOTCONN; > > + } > > + out.unique = 0; > > + out.error = notify_code; > > Please fully initialize all fuse_out_header fields so it's obvious that > there is no accidental information leak from virtiofsd to the guest: > > struct fuse_out_header out = { > .error = notify_code, > }; > > The host must not expose uninitialized memory to the guest (just like > the kernel vs userspace). fuse_send_msg() initializes out.len later, but > to be on the safe side I think we should be explicit here. Agreed. Its better to be explicit here and initialize fuse_out_header fully. Will do. Vivek From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2021 09:26:14 -0400 From: Vivek Goyal Message-ID: References: <20210930153037.1194279-1-vgoyal@redhat.com> <20210930153037.1194279-13-vgoyal@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH 12/13] virtiofsd: Implement blocking posix locks List-Id: Development discussions about virtio-fs List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Stefan Hajnoczi Cc: miklos@szeredi.hu, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, virtio-fs@redhat.com On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 04:07:04PM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 11:30:36AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > As of now we don't support fcntl(F_SETLKW) and if we see one, we return > > -EOPNOTSUPP. > > > > Change that by accepting these requests and returning a reply > > immediately asking caller to wait. Once lock is available, send a > > notification to the waiter indicating lock is available. > > > > In response to lock request, we are returning error value as "1", which > > signals to client to queue the lock request internally and later client > > will get a notification which will signal lock is taken (or error). And > > then fuse client should wake up the guest process. > > > > Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal > > Signed-off-by: Ioannis Angelakopoulos > > --- > > tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++- > > tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.h | 26 ++++++++++++ > > tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++--- > > tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > > 4 files changed, 167 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c b/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c > > index e4679c73ab..2e7f4b786d 100644 > > --- a/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c > > +++ b/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c > > @@ -179,8 +179,8 @@ int fuse_send_reply_iov_nofree(fuse_req_t req, int error, struct iovec *iov, > > .unique = req->unique, > > .error = error, > > }; > > - > > - if (error <= -1000 || error > 0) { > > + /* error = 1 has been used to signal client to wait for notificaiton */ > > s/notificaiton/notification/ Will fix. I have made too many spelling mistakes. :-( > > > + if (error <= -1000 || error > 1) { > > fuse_log(FUSE_LOG_ERR, "fuse: bad error value: %i\n", error); > > out.error = -ERANGE; > > } > > @@ -290,6 +290,11 @@ int fuse_reply_err(fuse_req_t req, int err) > > return send_reply(req, -err, NULL, 0); > > } > > > > +int fuse_reply_wait(fuse_req_t req) > > +{ > > + return send_reply(req, 1, NULL, 0); > > +} > > + > > void fuse_reply_none(fuse_req_t req) > > { > > fuse_free_req(req); > > @@ -2165,6 +2170,34 @@ static void do_destroy(fuse_req_t req, fuse_ino_t nodeid, > > send_reply_ok(req, NULL, 0); > > } > > > > +static int send_notify_iov(struct fuse_session *se, int notify_code, > > + struct iovec *iov, int count) > > +{ > > + struct fuse_out_header out; > > + if (!se->got_init) { > > + return -ENOTCONN; > > + } > > + out.unique = 0; > > + out.error = notify_code; > > Please fully initialize all fuse_out_header fields so it's obvious that > there is no accidental information leak from virtiofsd to the guest: > > struct fuse_out_header out = { > .error = notify_code, > }; > > The host must not expose uninitialized memory to the guest (just like > the kernel vs userspace). fuse_send_msg() initializes out.len later, but > to be on the safe side I think we should be explicit here. Agreed. Its better to be explicit here and initialize fuse_out_header fully. Will do. Vivek