Re: [PATCH 0/4] exportfs: add flag to allow marking export operations as only supporting file handles

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Dec 5, 2024 at 1:38 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Dec 01, 2024 at 02:12:24PM +0100, Christian Brauner wrote:
> > Hey,
> >
> > Some filesystems like kernfs and pidfs support file handles as a
> > convenience to enable the use of name_to_handle_at(2) and
> > open_by_handle_at(2) but don't want to and cannot be reliably exported.
> > Add a flag that allows them to mark their export operations accordingly
> > and make NFS check for its presence.
> >
> > @Amir, I'll reorder the patches such that this series comes prior to the
> > pidfs file handle series. Doing it that way will mean that there's never
> > a state where pidfs supports file handles while also being exportable.
> > It's probably not a big deal but it's definitely cleaner. It also means
> > the last patch in this series to mark pidfs as non-exportable can be
> > dropped. Instead pidfs export operations will be marked as
> > non-exportable in the patch that they are added in.
>
> Can you please invert the polarity?  Marking something as not supporting
> is always awkward.  Clearly marking it as supporting something (and
> writing down in detail what is required for that) is much better, even
> it might cause a little more churn initially.
>

Churn would be a bit annoying, but I guess it makes sense.
I agree with Christian that it should be done as cleanup to allow for
easier backport.

Please suggest a name for this opt-in flag.
EXPORT_OP_NFS_EXPORT???

Thanks,
Amir.





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux USB Development]     [Linux Media Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Info]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux