From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4DB48CCF9E3 for ; Tue, 11 Nov 2025 08:17:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1vIjZH-0003YO-6M; Tue, 11 Nov 2025 03:17:35 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1vIjZF-0003Sy-D7 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Nov 2025 03:17:33 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.129.124]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1vIjZD-0003t1-K4 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Nov 2025 03:17:33 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1762849050; 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=YusdMKKfuZa6AdZ+htp2fyUAslY0D7TTFVBo4lZHQYU=; b=MmMShZy2x1RLtDgu/JmyqrePmagmwBZNLJiwIek2k6z6q3aMa/L1amEnUU59p2NnSDr8+q S42JdrUPUAmm5rmt4p2tDkjAKbC3siOJTiWSAC+KZ0BdrOAcqJU2cVOIa6qinDK1QMEtai K7mVEBTiAQls0Uh/JzL6QRhg+St+Qu8= Received: from mx-prod-mc-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-35-165-154-97.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.165.154.97]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-649-SUAGR8pBNTSkLUuIH8PlPw-1; Tue, 11 Nov 2025 03:17:27 -0500 X-MC-Unique: SUAGR8pBNTSkLUuIH8PlPw-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: SUAGR8pBNTSkLUuIH8PlPw_1762849046 Received: from mx-prod-int-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.111]) (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 mx-prod-mc-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B694180057A; Tue, 11 Nov 2025 08:17:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blackfin.pond.sub.org (unknown [10.45.242.18]) by mx-prod-int-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C42331800361; Tue, 11 Nov 2025 08:17:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by blackfin.pond.sub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 228EC21E6A27; Tue, 11 Nov 2025 09:17:23 +0100 (CET) From: Markus Armbruster To: Kevin Wolf Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Chigot , qemu-block@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, hreitz@redhat.com, eblake@redhat.com, =?utf-8?Q?Daniel_P=2E_Berrang=C3=A9?= Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] vvfat: move fat_type check prior to size setup In-Reply-To: (Kevin Wolf's message of "Mon, 10 Nov 2025 16:29:52 +0100") References: <20251107145327.539481-1-chigot@adacore.com> <20251107145327.539481-3-chigot@adacore.com> <874ir2nqr9.fsf@pond.sub.org> <877bvykp3q.fsf@pond.sub.org> Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2025 09:17:23 +0100 Message-ID: <87ldkddlv0.fsf@pond.sub.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.30.177.111 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.129.124; envelope-from=armbru@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Kevin Wolf writes: > Am 10.11.2025 um 14:13 hat Markus Armbruster geschrieben: >> Cl=C3=A9ment Chigot writes: >>=20 >> > On Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 11:09=E2=80=AFAM Markus Armbruster wrote: >> >> >> >> Cl=C3=A9ment Chigot writes: [...] >> >> > So it is a special case in a way, but given that this is vvfat, whi= ch is >> >> > known to be unstable, not widely used outside of the occasional man= ual >> >> > use and not supported by libvirt, I'm willing to just make the chan= ge. >>=20 >> I'm fine to treat vvfat as unstable. But it's not marked as such in the >> QAPI schema! Is that a bug? Again, for Kevin. > > Maybe? Though the kind of unstable I think of with vvfat is more than > just API instability that the QAPI feature is about. vvfat is more a > dirty (and clever) hack that sometimes works and can be useful enough, > but if it breaks, you get to keep both pieces. Good for one-off uses on > your personal toy VM, but keep it far away from production. We never > seriously tried to get it to a properly supportable level. > > (And yes, probably none of this is documented as clearly as it should > be.) Do we need to differentiate between "unstable interface, may change incompatibly or be withdrawn in future releases, stay away if you don't want your software to break when this happens" and "known-wobbly feature, do not use in production"? Related ot Daniel's work on marking insecure objects, I think: Subject: [PATCH v2 00/32] Encode object type security status in code Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2025 15:01:11 +0100 Message-ID: <20250926140144.1998694-1-berrange@redhat.com>