From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-171.mta0.migadu.com (out-171.mta0.migadu.com [91.218.175.171]) (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 0321E2E413 for ; Fri, 5 Dec 2025 01:44:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.171 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1764899099; cv=none; b=cONl/6b9BXLlK4Hf9Yy6wO2ECqpwYvaSlAndllhiEdOXsW3wpGjHmDKBdPLO/poPrg48M30RwkvPjyO4V+aJhaS76nDPO/XF8fise/+i6PF1yl0hcqrJ4/qqCJPrj780nN7o12oG+soESXY941LFE4GecdMi0jSeEgcXC3BdFdM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1764899099; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Xq4FnqdqMMw5LwnWK9JYbB2ibycxGrW+X+KTjXef/qE=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=ZGKUhBnEof9ha58KL7GrpKSPMUzNnspKU3WSdRMNa+9m9jVebLbpahKm8w2EXee18iZqrnQJVTeoaI0CXx408El5qOw+nW6y1X3+Q+umOSOiFfbSPBYhCcNuj5WkoFSoCVjks2ctTpUksvZApg3xWOWIQyRP9bAsJxFMGI7+faY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=RgTBBq5k; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.171 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="RgTBBq5k" Message-ID: <7eac3a36-d2a2-400f-a4a2-7cec245a2709@linux.dev> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1764899085; 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: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=8N2Xcqu5T+Bstv2mPU1acoMfIS7Bq5WLmCYr4R3ahwA=; b=RgTBBq5kmf+8+6keEDC9Oof4eZdLwy84Rd4s1uTnl4yf+84QQIzaR9eUv6CE7vYyR6Vb++ xPzxdgMoWZ/uJPAp5hMdTqKULNMtBDoE4sGFJh7wW4YAk7GEWBeBsThpZugXOhUOECqAGG xM/Cl/dHTYfleJqlpV5QeuJeNQXNzQk= Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2025 09:44:05 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/10] smb: create common/common.h and common/common.c To: Steve French Cc: Namjae Jeon , sfrench@samba.org, linkinjeon@samba.org, linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, chenxiaosong@chenxiaosong.com, ChenXiaoSong References: <20251204045818.2590727-1-chenxiaosong.chenxiaosong@linux.dev> <20251204045818.2590727-10-chenxiaosong.chenxiaosong@linux.dev> <5f7758db-cf88-4335-9a03-72be1f7d6b65@linux.dev> Content-Language: en-US X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: ChenXiaoSong In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT Now, where should common/smb2maperror.c go? Should it be built into both cifs.ko and ksmbd.ko? Thanks, ChenXiaoSong. On 12/5/25 09:36, Steve French wrote: > i lean against an 'smbcommon.ko' - it can be helpful to move common > code (headers, #defines etc) into fs/smb/common but other than > smbdirect code (where smbdirect.ko makes sense for cifs.ko, ksmbd.ko, > Samba and user space AI apps e.g. to use), I lean against creating new > modules for the client and server. > > ksmbd.ko for server code > cifs.ko (or maybe someday renamed to smb3.ko) for client code > smbdirect.ko for the RDMA/smbdirect code shared by ksmbd/cifs.ko/userspace tools > > maybe (as they did for the md4 code creating an cifs_md4.ko so that > less secure code doesn't have to be linked in if unneeded) someday we > could split an "smb1.ko" out for the SMB1 related code (since we want > to discourage use of old insecure dialects, and could shrink cifs.ko, > and slightly simplify it) > > Finding common code is good - but let's not complicate things by > creating lots of new modules - in the short term the focus is on > sanely splitting the common RDMA/smbdirect code out (because 1) it is > large enough 2) it will have use cases outside of cifs.ko and > ksmbd.ko). But I lean against creating multiple new modules in the > short term. > > On Thu, Dec 4, 2025 at 6:59 PM ChenXiaoSong > wrote: >> >> OK, I will create new smb2maperror.ko and will send v2 soon. >> >> Thanks for your review and suggestions. >> >> Thanks, >> ChenXiaoSong. >> >> On 12/5/25 08:35, Namjae Jeon wrote: >>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2025 at 2:00 PM wrote: >>>> >>>> From: ChenXiaoSong >>>> >>>> Preparation for moving client/smb2maperror.c to common/. >>>> >>>> We can put cifs_md4 and smb2maperror into a single smb_common.ko, >>>> instead of creating two separate .ko (cifs_md4.ko and smb2maperror.ko). >>> Sorry, I prefer not to create new *.ko for only smb2maperror. >>>> >>>> - rename md4.h -> common.h, and update include guard >>>> - create common.c, and move module info from cifs_md4.c into common.c >>> ksmbd does not use md4 in smb/common, I don't prefer this either. >>> I would appreciate it if you could send me the patch set again except these. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: ChenXiaoSong >> > >