Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] Prepare for supporting more filesystems with fanotify

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

 



On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 5:45 PM Chuck Lever <cel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 11:13:33AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > On Tue, 2023-04-25 at 16:01 +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > > Jan,
> > >
> > > Following up on the FAN_REPORT_ANY_FID proposal [1], here is a shot at an
> > > alternative proposal to seamlessly support more filesystems.
> > >
> > > While fanotify relaxes the requirements for filesystems to support
> > > reporting fid to require only the ->encode_fh() operation, there are
> > > currently no new filesystems that meet the relaxed requirements.
> > >
> > > I will shortly post patches that allow overlayfs to meet the new
> > > requirements with default overlay configurations.
> > >
> > > The overlay and vfs/fanotify patch sets are completely independent.
> > > The are both available on my github branch [2] and there is a simple
> > > LTP test variant that tests reporting fid from overlayfs [3], which
> > > also demonstrates the minor UAPI change of name_to_handle_at(2) for
> > > requesting a non-decodeable file handle by userspace.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Amir.
> > >
> > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20230417162721.ouzs33oh6mb7vtft@quack3/
> > > [2] https://github.com/amir73il/linux/commits/exportfs_encode_fid
> > > [3] https://github.com/amir73il/ltp/commits/exportfs_encode_fid
> > >
> > > Amir Goldstein (4):
> > >   exportfs: change connectable argument to bit flags
> > >   exportfs: add explicit flag to request non-decodeable file handles
> > >   exportfs: allow exporting non-decodeable file handles to userspace
> > >   fanotify: support reporting non-decodeable file handles
> > >
> > >  Documentation/filesystems/nfs/exporting.rst |  4 +--
> > >  fs/exportfs/expfs.c                         | 29 ++++++++++++++++++---
> > >  fs/fhandle.c                                | 20 ++++++++------
> > >  fs/nfsd/nfsfh.c                             |  5 ++--
> > >  fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify.c               |  4 +--
> > >  fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify_user.c          |  6 ++---
> > >  fs/notify/fdinfo.c                          |  2 +-
> > >  include/linux/exportfs.h                    | 18 ++++++++++---
> > >  include/uapi/linux/fcntl.h                  |  5 ++++
> > >  9 files changed, 67 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
> > >
> >
> > This set looks fairly benign to me, so ACK on the general concept.
>
> Me also (modulo previous review comments), so
>
>   Acked-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> I assume either Amir or Jeff will take these when they are ready.
> If I'm wrong, please do let me know and I can take them via the
> NFSD tree.
>

With your and Jeff's ACKs I think it would be best if Jan takes
these changes through the fsnotify tree, because they are only
meant to improve fanotify at this point.

>
> > I am starting to dislike how the AT_* flags are turning into a bunch of
> > flags that only have meanings on certain syscalls. I don't see a cleaner
> > way to handle it though.

With all the various proposals of file_handle_v2, I still think that the
AT_HANDLE_FID is the cleanest in terms of API simplicity.

Just trying to document file_handle_v2 and backward compat with
file_handle_v1 gives me a headache and documenting AT_HANDLE_FID
is a no brainer.

so if nobody objects I will stick with AT_HANDLE_FID.

Thanks,
Amir.




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystems Devel]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux