On Fri 08-03-24 10:12:13, Luis Henriques wrote:
> Christian Brauner <brauner@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 04:13:56PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> >> On Fri 01-03-24 15:45:27, Luis Henriques wrote:
> >> > Christian Brauner <brauner@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> >> >
> >> > > On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 04:30:08PM +0000, Luis Henriques wrote:
> >> > >> Currently, only parameters that have the fs_parameter_spec 'type' set to
> >> > >> NULL are handled as 'flag' types. However, parameters that have the
> >> > >> 'fs_param_can_be_empty' flag set and their value is NULL should also be
> >> > >> handled as 'flag' type, as their type is set to 'fs_value_is_flag'.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Signed-off-by: Luis Henriques <lhenriques@xxxxxxx>
> >> > >> ---
> >> > >> fs/fs_parser.c | 3 ++-
> >> > >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >> > >>
> >> > >> diff --git a/fs/fs_parser.c b/fs/fs_parser.c
> >> > >> index edb3712dcfa5..53f6cb98a3e0 100644
> >> > >> --- a/fs/fs_parser.c
> >> > >> +++ b/fs/fs_parser.c
> >> > >> @@ -119,7 +119,8 @@ int __fs_parse(struct p_log *log,
> >> > >> /* Try to turn the type we were given into the type desired by the
> >> > >> * parameter and give an error if we can't.
> >> > >> */
> >> > >> - if (is_flag(p)) {
> >> > >> + if (is_flag(p) ||
> >> > >> + (!param->string && (p->flags & fs_param_can_be_empty))) {
> >> > >> if (param->type != fs_value_is_flag)
> >> > >> return inval_plog(log, "Unexpected value for '%s'",
> >> > >> param->key);
> >> > >
> >> > > If the parameter was derived from FSCONFIG_SET_STRING in fsconfig() then
> >> > > param->string is guaranteed to not be NULL. So really this is only
> >> > > about:
> >> > >
> >> > > FSCONFIG_SET_FD
> >> > > FSCONFIG_SET_BINARY
> >> > > FSCONFIG_SET_PATH
> >> > > FSCONFIG_SET_PATH_EMPTY
> >> > >
> >> > > and those values being used without a value. What filesystem does this?
> >> > > I don't see any.
> >> > >
> >> > > The tempting thing to do here is to to just remove fs_param_can_be_empty
> >> > > from every helper that isn't fs_param_is_string() until we actually have
> >> > > a filesystem that wants to use any of the above as flags. Will lose a
> >> > > lot of code that isn't currently used.
> >> >
> >> > Right, I find it quite confusing and I may be fixing the issue in the
> >> > wrong place. What I'm seeing with ext4 when I mount a filesystem using
> >> > the option '-o usrjquota' is that fs_parse() will get:
> >> >
> >> > * p->type is set to fs_param_is_string
> >> > ('p' is a struct fs_parameter_spec, ->type is a function)
> >> > * param->type is set to fs_value_is_flag
> >> > ('param' is a struct fs_parameter, ->type is an enum)
> >> >
> >> > This is because ext4 will use the __fsparam macro to set define a
> >> > fs_param_spec as a fs_param_is_string but will also set the
> >> > fs_param_can_be_empty; and the fsconfig() syscall will get that parameter
> >> > as a flag. That's why param->string will be NULL in this case.
> >>
> >> So I'm a bit confused here. Valid variants of these quota options are like
> >> "usrjquota=<filename>" (to set quota file name) or "usrjquota=" (to clear
> >> quota file name). The variant "usrjquota" should ideally be rejected
> >> because it doesn't make a good sense and only adds to confusion. Now as far
> >> as I'm reading fs/ext4/super.c: parse_options() (and as far as my testing
> >> shows) this is what is happening so what is exactly the problem you're
> >> trying to fix?
> >
> > mount(8) has no way of easily knowing that for something like
> > mount -o usrjquota /dev/sda1 /mnt that "usrjquota" is supposed to be
> > set as an empty string via FSCONFIG_SET_STRING. For mount(8) it is
> > indistinguishable from a flag because it's specified without an
> > argument. So mount(8) passes FSCONFIG_SET_FLAG and it seems strange that
> > we should require mount(8) to know what mount options are strings or no.
> > I've ran into this issue before myself when using the mount api
> > programatically.
>
> Right. A simple usecase is to try to do:
>
> mount -t ext4 -o usrjquota= /dev/sda1 /mnt/
>
> It will fail, and this has been broken for a while.
I see. But you have to have new enough mount that is using fsconfig, don't
you? Because for me in my test VM this works just fine...
But anyway, I get the point. Thanks for educating me :)
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR
