From: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com> To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: virtio-fs@redhat.com, Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>, "Dr . David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>, Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com> Subject: [PATCH for-5.2] virtiofsd: Announce submounts even without statx() Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 17:41:35 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20201103164135.169325-1-mreitz@redhat.com> (raw) Contrary to what the check (and warning) in lo_init() claims, we can announce submounts just fine even without statx() -- the check is based on comparing both the mount ID and st_dev of parent and child. Without statx(), we will not have the mount ID; but we always have st_dev. The only problems we have (without statx() and its mount ID) are: (1) Mounting the same device twice may lead to both trees being treated as exactly the same tree by virtiofsd. But that is a problem that is completely independent of mirroring host submounts in the guest. Both submount roots will still show the FUSE_SUBMOUNT flag, because their st_dev still differs from their respective parent. (2) There is only one exception to (1), and that is if you mount a device inside a mount of itself: Then, its st_dev will be the same as that of its parent, and so without a mount ID, virtiofsd will not be able to recognize the nested mount's root as a submount. However, thanks to virtiofsd then treating both trees as exactly the same tree, it will be caught up in a loop when the guest tries to examine the nested submount, so the guest will always see nothing but an ELOOP there. Therefore, this case is just fully broken without statx(), whether we check for submounts (based on st_dev) or not. All in all, checking for submounts works well even without comparing the mount ID (i.e., without statx()). The only concern is an edge case that, without statx() mount IDs, is utterly broken anyway. Thus, drop said check in lo_init(). Reported-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com> --- tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c | 8 -------- 1 file changed, 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c b/tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c index ec1008bceb..6c64b03f1a 100644 --- a/tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c +++ b/tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c @@ -610,14 +610,6 @@ static void lo_init(void *userdata, struct fuse_conn_info *conn) "does not support it\n"); lo->announce_submounts = false; } - -#ifndef CONFIG_STATX - if (lo->announce_submounts) { - fuse_log(FUSE_LOG_WARNING, "lo_init: Cannot announce submounts, there " - "is no statx()\n"); - lo->announce_submounts = false; - } -#endif } static void lo_getattr(fuse_req_t req, fuse_ino_t ino, -- 2.26.2
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com> To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: virtio-fs@redhat.com, Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com> Subject: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH for-5.2] virtiofsd: Announce submounts even without statx() Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 17:41:35 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20201103164135.169325-1-mreitz@redhat.com> (raw) Contrary to what the check (and warning) in lo_init() claims, we can announce submounts just fine even without statx() -- the check is based on comparing both the mount ID and st_dev of parent and child. Without statx(), we will not have the mount ID; but we always have st_dev. The only problems we have (without statx() and its mount ID) are: (1) Mounting the same device twice may lead to both trees being treated as exactly the same tree by virtiofsd. But that is a problem that is completely independent of mirroring host submounts in the guest. Both submount roots will still show the FUSE_SUBMOUNT flag, because their st_dev still differs from their respective parent. (2) There is only one exception to (1), and that is if you mount a device inside a mount of itself: Then, its st_dev will be the same as that of its parent, and so without a mount ID, virtiofsd will not be able to recognize the nested mount's root as a submount. However, thanks to virtiofsd then treating both trees as exactly the same tree, it will be caught up in a loop when the guest tries to examine the nested submount, so the guest will always see nothing but an ELOOP there. Therefore, this case is just fully broken without statx(), whether we check for submounts (based on st_dev) or not. All in all, checking for submounts works well even without comparing the mount ID (i.e., without statx()). The only concern is an edge case that, without statx() mount IDs, is utterly broken anyway. Thus, drop said check in lo_init(). Reported-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com> --- tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c | 8 -------- 1 file changed, 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c b/tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c index ec1008bceb..6c64b03f1a 100644 --- a/tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c +++ b/tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c @@ -610,14 +610,6 @@ static void lo_init(void *userdata, struct fuse_conn_info *conn) "does not support it\n"); lo->announce_submounts = false; } - -#ifndef CONFIG_STATX - if (lo->announce_submounts) { - fuse_log(FUSE_LOG_WARNING, "lo_init: Cannot announce submounts, there " - "is no statx()\n"); - lo->announce_submounts = false; - } -#endif } static void lo_getattr(fuse_req_t req, fuse_ino_t ino, -- 2.26.2
next reply other threads:[~2020-11-03 16:43 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-11-03 16:41 Max Reitz [this message] 2020-11-03 16:41 ` [Virtio-fs] [PATCH for-5.2] virtiofsd: Announce submounts even without statx() Max Reitz 2020-11-10 18:57 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert 2020-11-10 18:57 ` [Virtio-fs] " Dr. David Alan Gilbert 2020-11-11 12:07 ` Max Reitz 2020-11-11 12:07 ` [Virtio-fs] " Max Reitz 2020-11-12 15:41 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert 2020-11-12 15:41 ` [Virtio-fs] " Dr. David Alan Gilbert
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20201103164135.169325-1-mreitz@redhat.com \ --to=mreitz@redhat.com \ --cc=dgilbert@redhat.com \ --cc=mszeredi@redhat.com \ --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \ --cc=stefanha@redhat.com \ --cc=virtio-fs@redhat.com \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.