Re: Addressing architectural differences between FUSE driver and fs - Re: virtio-fs tests between host(x86) and dpu(arm64)

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

To: Peter-Jan Gootzen <pgootzen@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Addressing architectural differences between FUSE driver and fs - Re: virtio-fs tests between host(x86) and dpu(arm64)
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 11:18:40 +0200
Cc: Idan Zach <izach@xxxxxxxxxx>, Parav Pandit <parav@xxxxxxxxxx>, "virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "stefanha@xxxxxxxxxx" <stefanha@xxxxxxxxxx>, Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@xxxxxxxxxx>, "angus.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <angus.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Oren Duer <oren@xxxxxxxxxx>, Yoray Zack <yorayz@xxxxxxxxxx>, "mszeredi@xxxxxxxxxx" <mszeredi@xxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "bin.yang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <bin.yang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Eliav Bar-Ilan <eliavb@xxxxxxxxxx>, "mst@xxxxxxxxxx" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx>, "lege.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lege.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <464c42bc3711332c5f50a562d99eb8353ef24acb.camel@nvidia.com>
References: <SI2PR06MB53852C83901A0DDE55624063FFF32@SI2PR06MB5385.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com> <b55cb50b3ecf8d6132f8633ce346b6adc159b38c.camel@nvidia.com> <CAJfpegsppbYbbLaECO+K2xpg8v0XZaQKFRZRTj=gJc9p7swdvQ@mail.gmail.com> <bbf427150d16122da9dd2a8ebec0ab1c9a758b56.camel@nvidia.com> <CAJfpegshNFmJ-LVfRQW0YxNyWGyMMOmzLAoH65DLg4JxwBYyAA@mail.gmail.com> <20240603134427.GA1680150@fedora.redhat.com> <CAOssrKfw4MKbGu=dXAdT=R3_2RX6uGUUVS+NEZp0fcfiNwyDWw@mail.gmail.com> <20240603152801.GA1688749@fedora.redhat.com> <CAJfpegsr7hW1ryaZXFbA+njQQyoXgQ_H-wX-13n=YF86Bs7LxA@mail.gmail.com> <bc4bb938b875ef8931d42030ae85220c9763154f.camel@nvidia.com> <CAJfpegshpJ3=hXuxpeq79MuBv_E-MPpPb3GVg3oEP3p5t=VAZQ@mail.gmail.com> <464c42bc3711332c5f50a562d99eb8353ef24acb.camel@nvidia.com>

On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 at 11:08, Peter-Jan Gootzen <pgootzen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Option 2 is detectable if fuse_init_out.minor < CANON_ARCH_MINOR, not
> sure yet what we could do with that knowledge (maybe useful in error
> logging?).

Using the version for feature detection breaks if a feature is
backported.  So this method has been deprecated and not used on new
features.

Thanks,
Miklos

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Addressing architectural differences between FUSE driver and fs - Re: virtio-fs tests between host(x86) and dpu(arm64)
  - From: Peter-Jan Gootzen

References:
- virtio-fs tests between host(x86) and dpu(arm64)
  - From: Lege Wang
- Addressing architectural differences between FUSE driver and fs - Re: virtio-fs tests between host(x86) and dpu(arm64)
  - From: Peter-Jan Gootzen
- Re: Addressing architectural differences between FUSE driver and fs - Re: virtio-fs tests between host(x86) and dpu(arm64)
  - From: Miklos Szeredi
- Re: Addressing architectural differences between FUSE driver and fs - Re: virtio-fs tests between host(x86) and dpu(arm64)
  - From: Peter-Jan Gootzen
- Re: Addressing architectural differences between FUSE driver and fs - Re: virtio-fs tests between host(x86) and dpu(arm64)
  - From: Miklos Szeredi
- Re: Addressing architectural differences between FUSE driver and fs - Re: virtio-fs tests between host(x86) and dpu(arm64)
  - From: Stefan Hajnoczi
- Re: Addressing architectural differences between FUSE driver and fs - Re: virtio-fs tests between host(x86) and dpu(arm64)
  - From: Miklos Szeredi
- Re: Addressing architectural differences between FUSE driver and fs - Re: virtio-fs tests between host(x86) and dpu(arm64)
  - From: Stefan Hajnoczi
- Re: Addressing architectural differences between FUSE driver and fs - Re: virtio-fs tests between host(x86) and dpu(arm64)
  - From: Miklos Szeredi
- Re: Addressing architectural differences between FUSE driver and fs - Re: virtio-fs tests between host(x86) and dpu(arm64)
  - From: Peter-Jan Gootzen
- Re: Addressing architectural differences between FUSE driver and fs - Re: virtio-fs tests between host(x86) and dpu(arm64)
  - From: Miklos Szeredi
- Re: Addressing architectural differences between FUSE driver and fs - Re: virtio-fs tests between host(x86) and dpu(arm64)
  - From: Peter-Jan Gootzen

Prev by Date: Re: Addressing architectural differences between FUSE driver and fs - Re: virtio-fs tests between host(x86) and dpu(arm64)
Next by Date: RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH] vdpa: Add support for no-IOMMU mode
Previous by thread: Re: Addressing architectural differences between FUSE driver and fs - Re: virtio-fs tests between host(x86) and dpu(arm64)
Next by thread: Re: Addressing architectural differences between FUSE driver and fs - Re: virtio-fs tests between host(x86) and dpu(arm64)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [KVM Development] [Libvirt Development] [Libvirt Users] [CentOS Virtualization] [Netdev] [Ethernet Bridging] [Linux Wireless] [Kernel Newbies] [Security] [Linux for Hams] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Yosemite Forum] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux RAID] [Linux Admin] [Samba]