kvm crash with virtiofs

2024-06-06 Thread Miklos Szeredi
Hi, I get the below crash when running virtio-fs on fedora 39. Note: weirdly this makes chrome running on the host also crash. Eric Sandeen also reported some bad behavior of virtio-fs on fc39, which might be related. Versions: kernel-6.8.4-200.fc39.x86_64 qemu-kvm-8.1.3-5.fc39.x86_64

Re: [PATCH] virtiofsd: Don't allow file creation with FUSE_OPEN

2021-06-18 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 at 11:21, Greg Kurz wrote: > > On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 10:58:33 +0200 > Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > > On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 at 16:15, Greg Kurz wrote: > > > > > > A well behaved FUSE client uses FUSE_CREATE to create files. It isn't > > &g

Re: [PATCH] virtiofsd: Don't allow file creation with FUSE_OPEN

2021-06-18 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 at 16:15, Greg Kurz wrote: > > A well behaved FUSE client uses FUSE_CREATE to create files. It isn't > supposed to pass O_CREAT along a FUSE_OPEN request, as documented in > the "fuse_lowlevel.h" header : > > /** > * Open a file > * > * Open flags are

Re: [PATCH 1/3] virtiofsd: Find original inode ID of mount points

2021-06-02 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Wed, 2 Jun 2021 at 20:20, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 02:55:42PM +0200, Max Reitz wrote: > > Mount point directories represent two inodes: On one hand, they are a > > normal directory on their parent filesystem. On the other, they are the > > root node of the filesystem

Re: [Virtio-fs] [for-6.1 v3 3/3] virtiofsd: Add support for FUSE_SYNCFS request

2021-05-11 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 4:49 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 08:54:09AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 02:31:14PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > > On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 5:55 PM Greg Kurz wrote: > > > > > > &g

Re: [Virtio-fs] [for-6.1 v3 3/3] virtiofsd: Add support for FUSE_SYNCFS request

2021-05-11 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 5:55 PM Greg Kurz wrote: > > Honor the expected behavior of syncfs() to synchronously flush all data > and metadata on linux systems. Simply loop on all known submounts and > call syncfs() on them. Why not pass the submount's root to the server, so it can do just one

Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] virtiofsd: Add options to enable/disable posix acl

2021-02-19 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 3:34 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 11:50:54AM +, Luis Henriques wrote: > > Vivek Goyal writes: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > This is V2 of the patches. Changes since v1 are. > > > > > > - Rebased on top of latest master. > > > - Took care of Miklos's

Re: [PATCH 1/3] virtiofsd: Add an option to enable/disable posix acls

2021-02-17 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 4:07 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 09:53:04AM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 12:36 AM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > > > > > fuse has an option FUSE_POSIX_ACL which needs to be opted in by fuse >

Re: [PATCH 1/3] virtiofsd: Add an option to enable/disable posix acls

2021-02-17 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 12:36 AM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > fuse has an option FUSE_POSIX_ACL which needs to be opted in by fuse > server to enable posix acls. > > Add virtiofsd option "-o posix_acl/no_posix_acl" to let users enable/disable > posix acl support. By default it is disabled as of now.

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH v2] virtiofsd: prevent opening of special files (CVE-2020-35517)

2021-01-28 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 1:15 PM Greg Kurz wrote: > > On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 16:52:56 +0100 > Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 4:47 PM Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 4:35 PM Greg Kurz wrote: > > >

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH v2] virtiofsd: prevent opening of special files (CVE-2020-35517)

2021-01-27 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 4:47 PM Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 4:35 PM Greg Kurz wrote: > > > > On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 16:22:49 +0100 > > Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 4:09 PM Greg Kurz wrote: > > &

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH v2] virtiofsd: prevent opening of special files (CVE-2020-35517)

2021-01-27 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 4:35 PM Greg Kurz wrote: > > On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 16:22:49 +0100 > Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 4:09 PM Greg Kurz wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 15:09:50 +0100 > > > Miklos Szeredi wrote: >

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH v2] virtiofsd: prevent opening of special files (CVE-2020-35517)

2021-01-27 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 4:09 PM Greg Kurz wrote: > > On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 15:09:50 +0100 > Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > The semantics of O_CREATE are that it can fail neither because the > > file exists nor because it doesn't. This doesn't matter if the > > exported t

Re: [PATCH v3] virtiofsd: prevent opening of special files (CVE-2020-35517)

2021-01-27 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 3:14 PM Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 02:01:54PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > The problem here is there can also be a race between the open and the > > subsequent lo_do_lookup(). > > > > At this point

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH v2] virtiofsd: prevent opening of special files (CVE-2020-35517)

2021-01-27 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 2:49 PM Greg Kurz wrote: > > On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 11:34:52 +0100 > Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > Another solution specifically for O_CREAT without O_EXCL would be to > > turn it into an exclusive create. > > Would this added O_EXCL then app

Re: [PATCH v3] virtiofsd: prevent opening of special files (CVE-2020-35517)

2021-01-27 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 12:21 PM Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: } > @@ -1654,9 +1677,11 @@ static void update_open_flags(int writeback, int > allow_direct_io, > static void lo_create(fuse_req_t req, fuse_ino_t parent, const char *name, >mode_t mode, struct

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH v2] virtiofsd: prevent opening of special files (CVE-2020-35517)

2021-01-27 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 11:20 AM Greg Kurz wrote: > > On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 10:25:28 +0100 > Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 6:18 PM Greg Kurz wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 26 Jan 2021 10:35:02 + > > > Stefan Hajnoczi wrote

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH v2] virtiofsd: prevent opening of special files (CVE-2020-35517)

2021-01-27 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 6:18 PM Greg Kurz wrote: > > On Tue, 26 Jan 2021 10:35:02 + > Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > The patch looks pretty good to me. It just seems to be missing a change in > lo_create(): > > fd = openat(parent_inode->fd, name, (fi->flags | O_CREAT) & ~O_NOFOLLOW, >

Re: [PATCH] virtiofsd: prevent opening of special files (CVE-2020-35517)

2021-01-26 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 11:18 AM Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 05:12:23PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 3:44 PM Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > > > > > This patch adds the missing checks to virtiofsd. This is a short-term >

Re: [PATCH] virtiofsd: prevent opening of special files (CVE-2020-35517)

2021-01-25 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 3:44 PM Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > This patch adds the missing checks to virtiofsd. This is a short-term > solution because it does not prevent a compromised virtiofsd process > from opening device nodes on the host. I think the proper solution is adding support to the

Re: Some performance numbers for virtiofs, DAX and virtio-9p

2021-01-05 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 8:25 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 06:29:56PM +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > [..] > > > > > > > > Could we measure at what point does a large window size actually make > > > > performance worse? > > > > > > Will do. Will run tests with varying

Re: Some performance numbers for virtiofs, DAX and virtio-9p

2020-12-10 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 5:11 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > Conclusion > --- > - virtiofs DAX seems to help a lot in many workloads. > > Note, DAX performance well only if data fits in cache window. My total > data is 16G and cache window size is 16G as well. If data is larger > than DAX

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH] virtiofsd: Use --thread-pool-size=0 to mean no thread pool

2020-11-23 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 8:52 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 10:06:37AM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 11:35 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 08:33:50PM +, Venegas Munoz, Jose Carlos

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH] virtiofsd: Use --thread-pool-size=0 to mean no thread pool

2020-11-12 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 12:34 PM Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > > On Donnerstag, 12. November 2020 10:06:37 CET Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > > > 9p:cache=none <-> virtiofs:cache=none > > 9p:cache=loose <-> virtiofs:cache=always > > > > "9

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH] virtiofsd: Use --thread-pool-size=0 to mean no thread pool

2020-11-12 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 10:06 AM Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 11:35 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > > > On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 08:33:50PM +, Venegas Munoz, Jose Carlos wrote: > > > Hi Vivek, > > > > > > I have tested with Kata

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH] virtiofsd: Use --thread-pool-size=0 to mean no thread pool

2020-11-12 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 11:35 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 08:33:50PM +, Venegas Munoz, Jose Carlos wrote: > > Hi Vivek, > > > > I have tested with Kata 1.12-apha0, the results seems that are better for > > the use fio config I am tracking. > > > > The fio config does

Re: [PATCH v3 5/7] virtiofsd: Announce sub-mount points

2020-11-03 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 10:00 AM Max Reitz wrote: > > On 03.11.20 09:10, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 5:19 PM Max Reitz wrote: > >> > >> Whenever we encounter a directory with an st_dev or mount ID that > >> differs from that of its par

Re: [PATCH v3 0/7] virtiofsd: Announce submounts to the guest

2020-11-03 Thread Miklos Szeredi
description of this > series, and limit myself to describing the differences from v2: Other than the issues in 5/7: Reviewed-by: Miklos Szeredi Thanks, Miklos

Re: [PATCH v3 5/7] virtiofsd: Announce sub-mount points

2020-11-03 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 5:19 PM Max Reitz wrote: > > Whenever we encounter a directory with an st_dev or mount ID that > differs from that of its parent, we set the FUSE_ATTR_SUBMOUNT flag so > the guest can create a submount for it. > > We only need to do so in lo_do_lookup(). The following

Re: [PULL 00/32] VFIO updates 2020-10-26 (for QEMU 5.2 soft-freeze)

2020-10-28 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 10:19 AM Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > > I'm not comfortable trying to update Max's series to try to determine > > if FUSE_SUBMOUNTS can be interchanged with FUSE_ATTR_FLAGS, where the FUSE_SUBMOUNTS is the correct one, FUSE_ATTR_FLAGS was never merged into mainline

Re: [Virtio-fs] virtiofs vs 9p performance(Re: tools/virtiofs: Multi threading seems to hurt performance)

2020-09-29 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 4:01 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 03:49:04PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 3:18 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > > > > - virtiofs cache=none mode is faster than cache=auto mode for this > > >

Re: [Virtio-fs] virtiofs vs 9p performance(Re: tools/virtiofs: Multi threading seems to hurt performance)

2020-09-29 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 3:18 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > - virtiofs cache=none mode is faster than cache=auto mode for this > workload. Not sure why. One cause could be that readahead is not perfect at detecting the random pattern. Could we compare total I/O on the server vs. total I/O by fio?

Re: [PATCH] virtiofsd: Used glib "shared" thread pool

2020-09-22 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 11:32 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > glib offers thread pools and it seems to support "exclusive" and "shared" > thread pools. > > > https://developer.gnome.org/glib/stable/glib-Thread-Pools.html#g-thread-pool-new > > Currently we use "exlusive" thread pools but its performance

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH 0/2] virtiofsd: drop Linux capabilities(7)

2020-06-19 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 4:25 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 04:16:30PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 9:08 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 05:49:05PM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > > >

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH 0/2] virtiofsd: drop Linux capabilities(7)

2020-06-19 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 9:08 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 05:49:05PM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > > virtiofsd doesn't need of all Linux capabilities(7) available to root. > > Keep a > > whitelisted set of capabilities that we require. This improves security in > > case

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH] virtiofsd: remove symlink fallbacks

2020-05-14 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 5:43 AM Liu Bo wrote: > > On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 04:07:36PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > Path lookup in the kernel has special rules for looking up magic symlinks > > under /proc. If a filesystem operation is instructed to follow syml

[PATCH] virtiofsd: remove symlink fallbacks

2020-05-14 Thread Miklos Szeredi
same issue for xattr operations. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi --- tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c | 175 ++- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 169 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c b/tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c index 3ba1d9098460..2ce7c96085b

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH] virtiofsd: jail lo->proc_self_fd

2020-04-29 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 5:00 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 04:47:19PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 4:36 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 02:47:33PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > &

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH] virtiofsd: jail lo->proc_self_fd

2020-04-29 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 4:47 PM Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 4:36 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 02:47:33PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > > While it's not possible to escape the proc filesystem through > > &

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH] virtiofsd: jail lo->proc_self_fd

2020-04-29 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 4:36 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 02:47:33PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > While it's not possible to escape the proc filesystem through > > lo->proc_self_fd, it is possible to escape to the root of the proc > >

[PATCH] virtiofsd: jail lo->proc_self_fd

2020-04-29 Thread Miklos Szeredi
to the ancestor directories. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi --- tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c | 27 +-- 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c b/tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c index 4c35c95b256c..bc9c44c760f4 100644 --- a

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH] virtiofsd: Show submounts

2020-04-29 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 9:59 AM Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 9:15 PM Dr. David Alan Gilbert > wrote: > > > So our current sequence is: > > > >(new namespace) > > 1)if (mount(NULL, "/", NULL, MS_REC | MS_SLAVE, NULL) <

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH] virtiofsd: Show submounts

2020-04-29 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 10:31 AM Max Reitz wrote: > > On 28.04.20 21:15, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > So are you saying we need a: > >if (mount(NULL, "/", NULL, MS_REC | MS_SHARED, NULL) < 0) { > > > > and can this go straight after (1) ? > > Isn’t MS_SHARED and MS_SLAVE mutually

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH] virtiofsd: Show submounts

2020-04-29 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 9:15 PM Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > So our current sequence is: > >(new namespace) > 1)if (mount(NULL, "/", NULL, MS_REC | MS_SLAVE, NULL) < 0) { > 2) if (mount("proc", "/proc", "proc", > > 3) if (mount(source, source, NULL, MS_BIND |

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH] virtiofsd: Show submounts

2020-04-28 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 4:52 PM Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 06:59:02PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > * Max Reitz (mre...@redhat.com) wrote: > > > Currently, setup_mounts() bind-mounts the shared directory without > > > MS_REC. This makes all submounts disappear.

Re: [PATCH 072/104] virtiofsd: passthrough_ll: fix refcounting on remove/rename

2020-01-17 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 5:45 PM Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > * Misono Tomohiro (misono.tomoh...@jp.fujitsu.com) wrote: > > > From: Miklos Szeredi > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi > > > > I'm not familiar with qemu conventi

Re: [PATCH 068/104] virtiofsd: passthrough_ll: control readdirplus

2020-01-10 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 4:40 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 04:30:01PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 4:18 PM Daniel P. Berrangé > > wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 04:13:08PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrot

Re: [PATCH 068/104] virtiofsd: passthrough_ll: control readdirplus

2020-01-10 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 4:18 PM Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 04:13:08PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 4:04 PM Dr. David Alan Gilbert > > wrote: > > > > > > * Daniel P. Berrangé (berra...@redhat.com) wrote: &

Re: [PATCH 068/104] virtiofsd: passthrough_ll: control readdirplus

2020-01-10 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 4:04 PM Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > * Daniel P. Berrangé (berra...@redhat.com) wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 04:38:28PM +, Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git) > > wrote: > > > From: Miklos Szeredi > > > > > > > W

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH 0/2] virtiofsd: Two fix for xattr operation

2019-10-18 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 6:48 PM Miklos Szeredi wrote: > Even simpler: allow O_PATH descriptors for f*xattr(). Attached patch. Will post shortly. However, I think it would make sense to fix virtiofsd as well, as this will take time to percolate down, even if Al doesn't find anything wr

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH 0/2] virtiofsd: Two fix for xattr operation

2019-10-17 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 6:09 PM Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 01:23:57PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 12:05 PM Stefan Hajnoczi > > wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 07:37:52PM +0900,

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH 0/2] virtiofsd: Two fix for xattr operation

2019-10-17 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 5:25 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 01:23:57PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 12:05 PM Stefan Hajnoczi > > wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 07:37:52PM +0900, Misono Tomohiro wro

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH 0/2] virtiofsd: Two fix for xattr operation

2019-10-17 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 1:23 PM Miklos Szeredi wrote: > I see why this is being done, and it's not easy to fix properly > without the ..at() versions of these syscalls. One idea is to fork() > + fchdir(lo->proc_self_fd) + ..xattr(). Another related idea is to do > a unshare(

Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH 0/2] virtiofsd: Two fix for xattr operation

2019-10-17 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 12:05 PM Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 07:37:52PM +0900, Misono Tomohiro wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I test xattr operation on virtiofs using xfstest generic/062 > > (with -o xattr option and XFS backend) and see some problems. > > > > These patches