On Wed, Jul 30, 2025 at 10:32:22AM -0400, Mark Johnston wrote: > On Tue, Jul 29, 2025 at 06:09:35PM +0200, Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > > On Wednesday, July 23, 2025 5:55:58 PM CEST Mark Johnston wrote: > > > This is largely derived from existing Darwin support. FreeBSD > > > apparently has better support for *at() system calls so doesn't require > > > workarounds for a missing mknodat(). The implementation has a couple of > > > warts however: > > > - The extattr(2) system calls don't support anything akin to > > > XATTR_CREATE or XATTR_REPLACE, so a racy workaround is implemented. > > > - Attribute names cannot begin with "user." on ZFS, so the prefix is > > > trimmed off. FreeBSD's extattr system calls sport an extra > > > "namespace" identifier, and attributes created by the 9pfs backend > > > live in the universal user namespace, so this seems innocent enough. > > > > > > The 9pfs tests were verified to pass on the UFS, ZFS and tmpfs > > > filesystems. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mark Johnston <ma...@freebsd.org> > > > > Hi Mark, > > > > first off, the problem is I currently don't have a FreeBSD host to test and > > won't have the time in near future neither. > > > > So what was your general intention regarding this patch, fire and forget, or > > would you be around for issues/patches regarding 9pfs FreeBSD support? > > Thank you for taking a look. > > I'll certainly be around to help deal with issues and patches relating > to 9pfs+FreeBSD hosts. It's hard to prove that, but for what it's worth > I use QEMU fairly extensively for FreeBSD development when I can't use > the native hypervisor, and that's not likely to change anytime soon. > > Would adding myself to MAINTAINERS for virtio-9pfs (or a new > virtio-9pfs-freebsd category) be appropriate in that case?
> > > diff --git a/hw/9pfs/9p-util-freebsd.c b/hw/9pfs/9p-util-freebsd.c > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 0000000000..e649f79d4b > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/hw/9pfs/9p-util-freebsd.c > > > @@ -0,0 +1,124 @@ > > > +/* > > > + * 9p utilities (FreeBSD Implementation) > > > + * > > > + * This work is licensed under the terms of the GNU GPL, version 2 or > > > later. > > > + * See the COPYING file in the top-level directory. > > > + */ > > > > I think for new source files in QEMU the policy is to use > > SPDX-License-Identifier: ... now? > > checkpatch.pl does complain about that, yes, but it also qualifies the > warning with, "unless this file was copied from existing code already > having such text." I used 9p-util-darwin.c as a starting point for this > file, so kept the existing license text. I can certainly change it > though. In that case, this is fine as is. With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
