* [V9fs-developer] [RFC] we should solve create-unlink-getattr idiom @ 2018-02-09 7:10 ` jiangyiwen 0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: jiangyiwen @ 2018-02-09 7:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Van Hensbergen, Greg Kurz, v9fs-developer, qemu-devel Cc: aneesh.kumar, Ron Minnich, Latchesar Ionkov, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors, Veaceslav Falico Hi Eric and Greg, I encountered the similar problem with create-unlink-getattr idiom. I use the testcase that create-unlink-setattr idiom, and I see the bug is reported at https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1336794. Then I also see you already fix the issue and push the patch to upstream. https://github.com/ericvh/linux/commit/eaf70223eac094291169f5a6de580351890162a2 http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/626194/ Unfortunately, the two patches are not merged into master, I don't know the reason, so I suggest if the patche can be merged into master, and it will solve the create-unlink-getattr idiom. Thanks, Yiwen ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Qemu-devel] [V9fs-developer] [RFC] we should solve create-unlink-getattr idiom @ 2018-02-09 7:10 ` jiangyiwen 0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: jiangyiwen @ 2018-02-09 7:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Van Hensbergen, Greg Kurz, v9fs-developer, qemu-devel Cc: aneesh.kumar, Ron Minnich, Latchesar Ionkov, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors, Veaceslav Falico Hi Eric and Greg, I encountered the similar problem with create-unlink-getattr idiom. I use the testcase that create-unlink-setattr idiom, and I see the bug is reported at https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1336794. Then I also see you already fix the issue and push the patch to upstream. https://github.com/ericvh/linux/commit/eaf70223eac094291169f5a6de580351890162a2 http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/626194/ Unfortunately, the two patches are not merged into master, I don't know the reason, so I suggest if the patche can be merged into master, and it will solve the create-unlink-getattr idiom. Thanks, Yiwen ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [V9fs-developer] [RFC] we should solve create-unlink-getattr idiom @ 2018-02-09 7:10 ` jiangyiwen 0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: jiangyiwen @ 2018-02-09 7:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Van Hensbergen, Greg Kurz, v9fs-developer, qemu-devel Cc: aneesh.kumar, Ron Minnich, Latchesar Ionkov, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors, Veaceslav Falico Hi Eric and Greg, I encountered the similar problem with create-unlink-getattr idiom. I use the testcase that create-unlink-setattr idiom, and I see the bug is reported at https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1336794. Then I also see you already fix the issue and push the patch to upstream. https://github.com/ericvh/linux/commit/eaf70223eac094291169f5a6de580351890162a2 http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/626194/ Unfortunately, the two patches are not merged into master, I don't know the reason, so I suggest if the patche can be merged into master, and it will solve the create-unlink-getattr idiom. Thanks, Yiwen ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: [V9fs-developer] [RFC] we should solve create-unlink-getattr idiom 2018-02-09 7:10 ` jiangyiwen (?) @ 2018-02-09 7:21 ` Veaceslav Falico -1 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Veaceslav Falico @ 2018-02-09 7:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: jiangyiwen, Eric Van Hensbergen, Greg Kurz, v9fs-developer, qemu-devel Cc: aneesh.kumar, Ron Minnich, Latchesar Ionkov, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors Hi Yiwen, all, On 2/9/2018 8:10 AM, jiangyiwen wrote: > Hi Eric and Greg, > > I encountered the similar problem with create-unlink-getattr idiom. > I use the testcase that create-unlink-setattr idiom, and I see the > bug is reported at https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1336794. > Then I also see you already fix the issue and push the patch to upstream. > https://github.com/ericvh/linux/commit/eaf70223eac094291169f5a6de580351890162a2 > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/626194/ > > Unfortunately, the two patches are not merged into master, I don't know > the reason, so I suggest if the patche can be merged into master, and > it will solve the create-unlink-getattr idiom. As a follow up - the create-unlink-setattr (mainly ftruncate and anything else which works on fd instead of path) isn't fixed by these patches, but I'm currently working on a new patch, obviously on top of those two, to make the setattr work too. It's based on the same logic as the above patches though - use FIDs with open fd's guest side and use open fd's host side if possible with f* functions, otherwise path with l* functions. It's bigger than the QEMU getattr patch, as there are no f* functions available for ftruncate case, for example. So if those two patches could be merged it'd be a lot easier to then go forward with the setattr fix. Thank you! > > Thanks, > Yiwen > > . > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [V9fs-developer] [RFC] we should solve create-unlink-getattr idiom @ 2018-02-09 7:21 ` Veaceslav Falico 0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Veaceslav Falico @ 2018-02-09 7:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: jiangyiwen, Eric Van Hensbergen, Greg Kurz, v9fs-developer, qemu-devel Cc: aneesh.kumar, Ron Minnich, Latchesar Ionkov, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors Hi Yiwen, all, On 2/9/2018 8:10 AM, jiangyiwen wrote: > Hi Eric and Greg, > > I encountered the similar problem with create-unlink-getattr idiom. > I use the testcase that create-unlink-setattr idiom, and I see the > bug is reported at https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1336794. > Then I also see you already fix the issue and push the patch to upstream. > https://github.com/ericvh/linux/commit/eaf70223eac094291169f5a6de580351890162a2 > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/626194/ > > Unfortunately, the two patches are not merged into master, I don't know > the reason, so I suggest if the patche can be merged into master, and > it will solve the create-unlink-getattr idiom. As a follow up - the create-unlink-setattr (mainly ftruncate and anything else which works on fd instead of path) isn't fixed by these patches, but I'm currently working on a new patch, obviously on top of those two, to make the setattr work too. It's based on the same logic as the above patches though - use FIDs with open fd's guest side and use open fd's host side if possible with f* functions, otherwise path with l* functions. It's bigger than the QEMU getattr patch, as there are no f* functions available for ftruncate case, for example. So if those two patches could be merged it'd be a lot easier to then go forward with the setattr fix. Thank you! > > Thanks, > Yiwen > > . > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: [V9fs-developer] [RFC] we should solve create-unlink-getattr idiom @ 2018-02-09 7:21 ` Veaceslav Falico 0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Veaceslav Falico @ 2018-02-09 7:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: jiangyiwen, Eric Van Hensbergen, Greg Kurz, v9fs-developer, qemu-devel Cc: aneesh.kumar, Ron Minnich, Latchesar Ionkov, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors Hi Yiwen, all, On 2/9/2018 8:10 AM, jiangyiwen wrote: > Hi Eric and Greg, > > I encountered the similar problem with create-unlink-getattr idiom. > I use the testcase that create-unlink-setattr idiom, and I see the > bug is reported at https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1336794. > Then I also see you already fix the issue and push the patch to upstream. > https://github.com/ericvh/linux/commit/eaf70223eac094291169f5a6de580351890162a2 > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/626194/ > > Unfortunately, the two patches are not merged into master, I don't know > the reason, so I suggest if the patche can be merged into master, and > it will solve the create-unlink-getattr idiom. As a follow up - the create-unlink-setattr (mainly ftruncate and anything else which works on fd instead of path) isn't fixed by these patches, but I'm currently working on a new patch, obviously on top of those two, to make the setattr work too. It's based on the same logic as the above patches though - use FIDs with open fd's guest side and use open fd's host side if possible with f* functions, otherwise path with l* functions. It's bigger than the QEMU getattr patch, as there are no f* functions available for ftruncate case, for example. So if those two patches could be merged it'd be a lot easier to then go forward with the setattr fix. Thank you! > > Thanks, > Yiwen > > . > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: [V9fs-developer] [RFC] we should solve create-unlink-getattr idiom 2018-02-09 7:21 ` Veaceslav Falico (?) @ 2018-02-09 11:49 ` Greg Kurz -1 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Greg Kurz @ 2018-02-09 11:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Veaceslav Falico Cc: jiangyiwen, Eric Van Hensbergen, v9fs-developer, qemu-devel, aneesh.kumar, Ron Minnich, Latchesar Ionkov, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 08:21:52 +0100 Veaceslav Falico <veaceslav.falico@huawei.com> wrote: > Hi Yiwen, all, > > On 2/9/2018 8:10 AM, jiangyiwen wrote: > > Hi Eric and Greg, > > > > I encountered the similar problem with create-unlink-getattr idiom. > > I use the testcase that create-unlink-setattr idiom, and I see the > > bug is reported at https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1336794. > > Then I also see you already fix the issue and push the patch to upstream. > > https://github.com/ericvh/linux/commit/eaf70223eac094291169f5a6de580351890162a2 > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/626194/ > > > > Unfortunately, the two patches are not merged into master, I don't know > > the reason, so I suggest if the patche can be merged into master, and > > it will solve the create-unlink-getattr idiom. > > As a follow up - the create-unlink-setattr (mainly ftruncate and anything > else which works on fd instead of path) isn't fixed by these patches, but > I'm currently working on a new patch, obviously on top of those two, to > make the setattr work too. > > It's based on the same logic as the above patches though - use FIDs with > open fd's guest side and use open fd's host side if possible with f* > functions, otherwise path with l* functions. > > It's bigger than the QEMU getattr patch, as there are no f* functions > available for ftruncate case, for example. > As I was saying to Yiwen, maybe have a look at: https://github.com/gkurz/qemu/commits/9p-attr-fixes It is probably too old to rebase cleanly on current master, but it gives the general idea. IIRC, the cause for this not moving forward was because of an issue unveiled/introduced by patch 3/3 in the linux 9p driver: https://sourceforge.net/p/v9fs/mailman/v9fs-developer/thread/20160704141655.GA5799%40u-isr-cdi-08/#msg35199720 and a general lack of care for the 9p code at the time... but it seems you guys are willing to go forward, and that's cool ! :) Cheers, -- Greg > So if those two patches could be merged it'd be a lot easier to then > go forward with the setattr fix. > > Thank you! > > > > > Thanks, > > Yiwen > > > > . > > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [V9fs-developer] [RFC] we should solve create-unlink-getattr idiom @ 2018-02-09 11:49 ` Greg Kurz 0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Greg Kurz @ 2018-02-09 11:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Veaceslav Falico Cc: jiangyiwen, Eric Van Hensbergen, v9fs-developer, qemu-devel, aneesh.kumar, Ron Minnich, Latchesar Ionkov, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 08:21:52 +0100 Veaceslav Falico <veaceslav.falico@huawei.com> wrote: > Hi Yiwen, all, > > On 2/9/2018 8:10 AM, jiangyiwen wrote: > > Hi Eric and Greg, > > > > I encountered the similar problem with create-unlink-getattr idiom. > > I use the testcase that create-unlink-setattr idiom, and I see the > > bug is reported at https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1336794. > > Then I also see you already fix the issue and push the patch to upstream. > > https://github.com/ericvh/linux/commit/eaf70223eac094291169f5a6de580351890162a2 > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/626194/ > > > > Unfortunately, the two patches are not merged into master, I don't know > > the reason, so I suggest if the patche can be merged into master, and > > it will solve the create-unlink-getattr idiom. > > As a follow up - the create-unlink-setattr (mainly ftruncate and anything > else which works on fd instead of path) isn't fixed by these patches, but > I'm currently working on a new patch, obviously on top of those two, to > make the setattr work too. > > It's based on the same logic as the above patches though - use FIDs with > open fd's guest side and use open fd's host side if possible with f* > functions, otherwise path with l* functions. > > It's bigger than the QEMU getattr patch, as there are no f* functions > available for ftruncate case, for example. > As I was saying to Yiwen, maybe have a look at: https://github.com/gkurz/qemu/commits/9p-attr-fixes It is probably too old to rebase cleanly on current master, but it gives the general idea. IIRC, the cause for this not moving forward was because of an issue unveiled/introduced by patch 3/3 in the linux 9p driver: https://sourceforge.net/p/v9fs/mailman/v9fs-developer/thread/20160704141655.GA5799%40u-isr-cdi-08/#msg35199720 and a general lack of care for the 9p code at the time... but it seems you guys are willing to go forward, and that's cool ! :) Cheers, -- Greg > So if those two patches could be merged it'd be a lot easier to then > go forward with the setattr fix. > > Thank you! > > > > > Thanks, > > Yiwen > > > > . > > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: [V9fs-developer] [RFC] we should solve create-unlink-getattr idiom @ 2018-02-09 11:49 ` Greg Kurz 0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Greg Kurz @ 2018-02-09 11:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Veaceslav Falico Cc: jiangyiwen, Eric Van Hensbergen, v9fs-developer, qemu-devel, aneesh.kumar, Ron Minnich, Latchesar Ionkov, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 08:21:52 +0100 Veaceslav Falico <veaceslav.falico@huawei.com> wrote: > Hi Yiwen, all, > > On 2/9/2018 8:10 AM, jiangyiwen wrote: > > Hi Eric and Greg, > > > > I encountered the similar problem with create-unlink-getattr idiom. > > I use the testcase that create-unlink-setattr idiom, and I see the > > bug is reported at https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1336794. > > Then I also see you already fix the issue and push the patch to upstream. > > https://github.com/ericvh/linux/commit/eaf70223eac094291169f5a6de580351890162a2 > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/626194/ > > > > Unfortunately, the two patches are not merged into master, I don't know > > the reason, so I suggest if the patche can be merged into master, and > > it will solve the create-unlink-getattr idiom. > > As a follow up - the create-unlink-setattr (mainly ftruncate and anything > else which works on fd instead of path) isn't fixed by these patches, but > I'm currently working on a new patch, obviously on top of those two, to > make the setattr work too. > > It's based on the same logic as the above patches though - use FIDs with > open fd's guest side and use open fd's host side if possible with f* > functions, otherwise path with l* functions. > > It's bigger than the QEMU getattr patch, as there are no f* functions > available for ftruncate case, for example. > As I was saying to Yiwen, maybe have a look at: https://github.com/gkurz/qemu/commits/9p-attr-fixes It is probably too old to rebase cleanly on current master, but it gives the general idea. IIRC, the cause for this not moving forward was because of an issue unveiled/introduced by patch 3/3 in the linux 9p driver: https://sourceforge.net/p/v9fs/mailman/v9fs-developer/thread/20160704141655.GA5799%40u-isr-cdi-08/#msg35199720 and a general lack of care for the 9p code at the time... but it seems you guys are willing to go forward, and that's cool ! :) Cheers, -- Greg > So if those two patches could be merged it'd be a lot easier to then > go forward with the setattr fix. > > Thank you! > > > > > Thanks, > > Yiwen > > > > . > > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: [V9fs-developer] [RFC] we should solve create-unlink-getattr idiom 2018-02-09 7:10 ` jiangyiwen (?) @ 2018-02-09 11:33 ` Greg Kurz -1 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Greg Kurz @ 2018-02-09 11:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: jiangyiwen Cc: Eric Van Hensbergen, v9fs-developer, qemu-devel, aneesh.kumar, Ron Minnich, Latchesar Ionkov, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors, Veaceslav Falico On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 15:10:46 +0800 jiangyiwen <jiangyiwen@huawei.com> wrote: > Hi Eric and Greg, > > I encountered the similar problem with create-unlink-getattr idiom. > I use the testcase that create-unlink-setattr idiom, and I see the > bug is reported at https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1336794. > Then I also see you already fix the issue and push the patch to upstream. > https://github.com/ericvh/linux/commit/eaf70223eac094291169f5a6de580351890162a2 > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/626194/ > > Unfortunately, the two patches are not merged into master, I don't know > the reason, so I suggest if the patche can be merged into master, and > it will solve the create-unlink-getattr idiom. > I had tried to go a bit further and address the general issue of f*() syscalls versus unlinked files: QEMU: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-06/msg07586.html Linux 9p driver: https://sourceforge.net/p/v9fs/mailman/message/35175775/ I remember that some issues were then reported during review of the linux patches, and I never got bandwidth to investigate further... But if you'd like to resurrect these threads, please do. :) > Thanks, > Yiwen > Cheers, -- Greg ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [V9fs-developer] [RFC] we should solve create-unlink-getattr idiom @ 2018-02-09 11:33 ` Greg Kurz 0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Greg Kurz @ 2018-02-09 11:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: jiangyiwen Cc: Eric Van Hensbergen, v9fs-developer, qemu-devel, aneesh.kumar, Ron Minnich, Latchesar Ionkov, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors, Veaceslav Falico On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 15:10:46 +0800 jiangyiwen <jiangyiwen@huawei.com> wrote: > Hi Eric and Greg, > > I encountered the similar problem with create-unlink-getattr idiom. > I use the testcase that create-unlink-setattr idiom, and I see the > bug is reported at https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1336794. > Then I also see you already fix the issue and push the patch to upstream. > https://github.com/ericvh/linux/commit/eaf70223eac094291169f5a6de580351890162a2 > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/626194/ > > Unfortunately, the two patches are not merged into master, I don't know > the reason, so I suggest if the patche can be merged into master, and > it will solve the create-unlink-getattr idiom. > I had tried to go a bit further and address the general issue of f*() syscalls versus unlinked files: QEMU: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-06/msg07586.html Linux 9p driver: https://sourceforge.net/p/v9fs/mailman/message/35175775/ I remember that some issues were then reported during review of the linux patches, and I never got bandwidth to investigate further... But if you'd like to resurrect these threads, please do. :) > Thanks, > Yiwen > Cheers, -- Greg ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: [V9fs-developer] [RFC] we should solve create-unlink-getattr idiom @ 2018-02-09 11:33 ` Greg Kurz 0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Greg Kurz @ 2018-02-09 11:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: jiangyiwen Cc: Eric Van Hensbergen, v9fs-developer, qemu-devel, aneesh.kumar, Ron Minnich, Latchesar Ionkov, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors, Veaceslav Falico On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 15:10:46 +0800 jiangyiwen <jiangyiwen@huawei.com> wrote: > Hi Eric and Greg, > > I encountered the similar problem with create-unlink-getattr idiom. > I use the testcase that create-unlink-setattr idiom, and I see the > bug is reported at https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1336794. > Then I also see you already fix the issue and push the patch to upstream. > https://github.com/ericvh/linux/commit/eaf70223eac094291169f5a6de580351890162a2 > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/626194/ > > Unfortunately, the two patches are not merged into master, I don't know > the reason, so I suggest if the patche can be merged into master, and > it will solve the create-unlink-getattr idiom. > I had tried to go a bit further and address the general issue of f*() syscalls versus unlinked files: QEMU: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-06/msg07586.html Linux 9p driver: https://sourceforge.net/p/v9fs/mailman/message/35175775/ I remember that some issues were then reported during review of the linux patches, and I never got bandwidth to investigate further... But if you'd like to resurrect these threads, please do. :) > Thanks, > Yiwen > Cheers, -- Greg ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: [V9fs-developer] [RFC] we should solve create-unlink-getattr idiom 2018-02-09 11:33 ` Greg Kurz (?) @ 2018-02-11 2:33 ` jiangyiwen -1 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: jiangyiwen @ 2018-02-11 2:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Greg Kurz Cc: Eric Van Hensbergen, v9fs-developer, qemu-devel, aneesh.kumar, Ron Minnich, Latchesar Ionkov, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors, Veaceslav Falico On 2018/2/9 19:33, Greg Kurz wrote: > On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 15:10:46 +0800 > jiangyiwen <jiangyiwen@huawei.com> wrote: > >> Hi Eric and Greg, >> >> I encountered the similar problem with create-unlink-getattr idiom. >> I use the testcase that create-unlink-setattr idiom, and I see the >> bug is reported at https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1336794. >> Then I also see you already fix the issue and push the patch to upstream. >> https://github.com/ericvh/linux/commit/eaf70223eac094291169f5a6de580351890162a2 >> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/626194/ >> >> Unfortunately, the two patches are not merged into master, I don't know >> the reason, so I suggest if the patche can be merged into master, and >> it will solve the create-unlink-getattr idiom. >> > > I had tried to go a bit further and address the general issue of f*() syscalls > versus unlinked files: > > QEMU: > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-06/msg07586.html > > Linux 9p driver: > https://sourceforge.net/p/v9fs/mailman/message/35175775/ > > I remember that some issues were then reported during review of the > linux patches, and I never got bandwidth to investigate further... > > But if you'd like to resurrect these threads, please do. :) > >> Thanks, >> Yiwen >> > > Cheers, > > -- > Greg > > . > Thanks Greg, Ok, we will move forward, I hope we can solve these problems that you encountered. Thanks, Yiwen. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [V9fs-developer] [RFC] we should solve create-unlink-getattr idiom @ 2018-02-11 2:33 ` jiangyiwen 0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: jiangyiwen @ 2018-02-11 2:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Greg Kurz Cc: Eric Van Hensbergen, v9fs-developer, qemu-devel, aneesh.kumar, Ron Minnich, Latchesar Ionkov, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors, Veaceslav Falico On 2018/2/9 19:33, Greg Kurz wrote: > On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 15:10:46 +0800 > jiangyiwen <jiangyiwen@huawei.com> wrote: > >> Hi Eric and Greg, >> >> I encountered the similar problem with create-unlink-getattr idiom. >> I use the testcase that create-unlink-setattr idiom, and I see the >> bug is reported at https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1336794. >> Then I also see you already fix the issue and push the patch to upstream. >> https://github.com/ericvh/linux/commit/eaf70223eac094291169f5a6de580351890162a2 >> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/626194/ >> >> Unfortunately, the two patches are not merged into master, I don't know >> the reason, so I suggest if the patche can be merged into master, and >> it will solve the create-unlink-getattr idiom. >> > > I had tried to go a bit further and address the general issue of f*() syscalls > versus unlinked files: > > QEMU: > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-06/msg07586.html > > Linux 9p driver: > https://sourceforge.net/p/v9fs/mailman/message/35175775/ > > I remember that some issues were then reported during review of the > linux patches, and I never got bandwidth to investigate further... > > But if you'd like to resurrect these threads, please do. :) > >> Thanks, >> Yiwen >> > > Cheers, > > -- > Greg > > . > Thanks Greg, Ok, we will move forward, I hope we can solve these problems that you encountered. Thanks, Yiwen. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: [V9fs-developer] [RFC] we should solve create-unlink-getattr idiom @ 2018-02-11 2:33 ` jiangyiwen 0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: jiangyiwen @ 2018-02-11 2:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Greg Kurz Cc: Eric Van Hensbergen, v9fs-developer, qemu-devel, aneesh.kumar, Ron Minnich, Latchesar Ionkov, linux-kernel, kernel-janitors, Veaceslav Falico On 2018/2/9 19:33, Greg Kurz wrote: > On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 15:10:46 +0800 > jiangyiwen <jiangyiwen@huawei.com> wrote: > >> Hi Eric and Greg, >> >> I encountered the similar problem with create-unlink-getattr idiom. >> I use the testcase that create-unlink-setattr idiom, and I see the >> bug is reported at https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1336794. >> Then I also see you already fix the issue and push the patch to upstream. >> https://github.com/ericvh/linux/commit/eaf70223eac094291169f5a6de580351890162a2 >> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/626194/ >> >> Unfortunately, the two patches are not merged into master, I don't know >> the reason, so I suggest if the patche can be merged into master, and >> it will solve the create-unlink-getattr idiom. >> > > I had tried to go a bit further and address the general issue of f*() syscalls > versus unlinked files: > > QEMU: > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-06/msg07586.html > > Linux 9p driver: > https://sourceforge.net/p/v9fs/mailman/message/35175775/ > > I remember that some issues were then reported during review of the > linux patches, and I never got bandwidth to investigate further... > > But if you'd like to resurrect these threads, please do. :) > >> Thanks, >> Yiwen >> > > Cheers, > > -- > Greg > > . > Thanks Greg, Ok, we will move forward, I hope we can solve these problems that you encountered. Thanks, Yiwen. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2018-02-11 2:33 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 15+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2018-02-09 7:10 [V9fs-developer] [RFC] we should solve create-unlink-getattr idiom jiangyiwen 2018-02-09 7:10 ` [Qemu-devel] " jiangyiwen 2018-02-09 7:10 ` jiangyiwen 2018-02-09 7:21 ` Veaceslav Falico 2018-02-09 7:21 ` [Qemu-devel] " Veaceslav Falico 2018-02-09 7:21 ` Veaceslav Falico 2018-02-09 11:49 ` Greg Kurz 2018-02-09 11:49 ` [Qemu-devel] " Greg Kurz 2018-02-09 11:49 ` Greg Kurz 2018-02-09 11:33 ` Greg Kurz 2018-02-09 11:33 ` [Qemu-devel] " Greg Kurz 2018-02-09 11:33 ` Greg Kurz 2018-02-11 2:33 ` jiangyiwen 2018-02-11 2:33 ` [Qemu-devel] " jiangyiwen 2018-02-11 2:33 ` jiangyiwen
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.