From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 392542209B for ; Mon, 3 Jun 2024 13:44:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1717422276; cv=none; b=MDekZ75rbsodLJvZfUYPC5PHIRhfiK+4tFZxl9pRsRj5wGOTxcUOMb6DEdlgCIZIGBfozrvfXzOPyuuG4SMGpoBGnsWT2QMyDV2l2SnY1ZK1fFScZLHy5s+5z6ZOzDi3Bz6GKZMW30ajLm/E9uL81iGQM6+hWDLIwNMl1ta/5B4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1717422276; c=relaxed/simple; bh=OGYYT4aVNYM2tWfVMoDcUtFwbRfNH7eAQrhxgzdp1qM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=EheVllAT4U7cWrnenINurKKt/W5nyRnkaHHqVW1A2rZX/LrhftxwmVtdRvPSKTNehJPE5NtCOpelgkQrKn41a/TRJ/hWBznMR9K87FJXNS6UCmVIjPXo0+rAA+pthqovcpqqPU7Y7TvurJtcw8L/+A5oOuyfCNuVww2c0UZJcks= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=RZ0CM/ld; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="RZ0CM/ld" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1717422274; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=8jdv+ECwxRJxFhTMGmQ1KqQnmmX5QOjTHqbjqi1D+WM=; b=RZ0CM/ldh24r7V4v4duambio6GUuCdV+qV2Suet0ebP44S3JKl43lQkhVjqwOS95Hyi+VH Si97qB+Qiv8II8BpvYKSKZp74WR/4NWZY/cqstmdrAPStHFRAS6NISlnmziG10VwgswOMt VztgFqNCV7ArLLvqZ2wNV/pgZ1iCqWA= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mx-ext.redhat.com [66.187.233.73]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-21-4Ch3gP0XM12UZRKLutKkfA-1; Mon, 03 Jun 2024 09:44:31 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 4Ch3gP0XM12UZRKLutKkfA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.8]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD7343C025AD; Mon, 3 Jun 2024 13:44:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [10.39.193.136]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CB9FC15C04; Mon, 3 Jun 2024 13:44:28 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 09:44:27 -0400 From: Stefan Hajnoczi To: Miklos Szeredi Cc: Peter-Jan Gootzen , Idan Zach , Yoray Zack , "virtualization@lists.linux.dev" , Parav Pandit , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "bin.yang@jaguarmicro.com" , Max Gurtovoy , "mszeredi@redhat.com" , Eliav Bar-Ilan , "mst@redhat.com" , "lege.wang@jaguarmicro.com" , Oren Duer , "angus.chen@jaguarmicro.com" Subject: Re: Addressing architectural differences between FUSE driver and fs - Re: virtio-fs tests between host(x86) and dpu(arm64) Message-ID: <20240603134427.GA1680150@fedora.redhat.com> References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: virtualization@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Y8uNWZsMC5ooxXDF" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.11.54.8 --Y8uNWZsMC5ooxXDF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Jun 03, 2024 at 11:06:19AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > On Mon, 3 Jun 2024 at 10:53, Peter-Jan Gootzen wrot= e: >=20 > > We also considered this idea, it would kind of be like locking FUSE into > > being x86. However I think this is not backwards compatible. Currently > > an ARM64 client and ARM64 server work just fine. But making such a > > change would break if the client has the new driver version and the > > server is not updated to know that it should interpret x86 specifically. >=20 > This would need to be negotiated, of course. >=20 > But it's certainly simpler to just indicate the client arch in the > INIT request. Let's go with that for now. In the long term it would be cleanest to choose a single canonical format instead of requiring drivers and devices to implement many arch-specific formats. I liked the single canonical format idea you suggested. My only concern is whether there are more commands/fields in FUSE that operate in an arch-specific way (e.g. ioctl)? If there really are parts that need to be arch-specific, then it might be necessary to negotiate an architecture after all. Stefan >=20 > Thanks, > Miklos >=20 --Y8uNWZsMC5ooxXDF Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEhpWov9P5fNqsNXdanKSrs4Grc8gFAmZdyLsACgkQnKSrs4Gr c8g4Tgf8COEJi4kzlMDChTuLm+fsLcHV41ng+vGBfzzxoJKQjIotpIKxRKkPkm11 nEDf2EO1SomgzkQCDuVymDviTC8C+Dzd4xKsBqaVMWjV0RkGMYhZY+oe21ckRz97 yz31bftIz+STEi3FQ3a/U3Swgy04XZ2GwCJkNxUpdVLHb37yZOCA6N9K/PSu9ZVs SdmesUwl7p2joB/zQJJt+42Q+VE+MEF0TXzrNe1CG+XWCugN29dbW9FghUZ97zJb 0t/x4N4uoFKnTUuPFkLw2RUxfyaeSxbzKdGiX2KF9DL7dTZjgno/NCnjohQfb2LL akcutpV3LucF5xmkwOH1ACZoNCV6CA== =cv8W -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Y8uNWZsMC5ooxXDF--