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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96D6EC4363A for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 10:13:16 +0000 (UTC) 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 mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E8746206E3 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 10:13:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="e9E/ztHp" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org E8746206E3 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:50698 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kYRPG-0007c8-Ds for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 06:13:14 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42304) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kYRNf-0006Fe-Gp for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 06:11:36 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([63.128.21.124]:32050) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kYRNb-0003VG-7f for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 06:11:35 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1604052690; 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=A7C7ZFvh8dYAWvbu5eSaA1GFbtpsWKvy0DidOZ3L2jk=; b=e9E/ztHpT5uQh5N5Yn0+PRJ8xou4HimbTERTVjWS35ox3Yj1+WZwNgx8keYSqikip3dD6G qvz+bHLTdQdZ/yopA6G92ZTKxSdbyeKOdqJ6T+dtMFtnwdEM696V63UeEWB02dKgpAqjtq DyZA9+wj/bL7MoApsQ2oZ/q/FKnNz4s= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-202-VyMG6Px3OU2prLemfSBSVA-1; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 06:11:26 -0400 X-MC-Unique: VyMG6Px3OU2prLemfSBSVA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 065315700E; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 10:11:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blackfin.pond.sub.org (ovpn-112-182.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.182]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC88260BFA; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 10:11:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: by blackfin.pond.sub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 66FF7113865F; Fri, 30 Oct 2020 11:11:20 +0100 (CET) From: Markus Armbruster To: =?utf-8?Q?Marc-Andr=C3=A9?= Lureau Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] sockets: Attempt to drain the abstract socket swamp References: <20201029133833.3450220-1-armbru@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 11:11:19 +0100 In-Reply-To: (=?utf-8?Q?=22Marc-Andr=C3=A9?= Lureau"'s message of "Thu, 29 Oct 2020 17:53:25 +0400") Message-ID: <87pn50vxa0.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.12 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=armbru@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Received-SPF: pass client-ip=63.128.21.124; envelope-from=armbru@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/10/30 01:22:25 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] 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_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=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: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Kevin Wolf , "Daniel P. Berrange" , xiaoqiang zhao , QEMU , Gerd Hoffmann , Paolo Bonzini Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" Marc-Andr=C3=A9 Lureau writes: > Hi Markus, > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 5:43 PM Markus Armbruster wro= te: > >> In my opinion, the Linux-specific abstract UNIX domain socket feature >> introduced in 5.1 should have been rejected. The feature is niche, >> the interface clumsy, the implementation buggy and incomplete, and the >> test coverage insufficient. Review fail. >> > > I also failed (as chardev maintainer..) to not only review but weigh in a= nd > discuss the merits or motivations behind it. > > I agree with you. Also the commit lacks motivation behind this "feature". > > >> Fixing the parts we can still fix now is regrettably expensive. If I >> had the power to decide, I'd unceremoniously revert the feature, >> compatibility to 5.1 be damned. But I don't, so here we go. >> >> I'm not sure this set of fixes is complete. However, I already spent >> too much time on this, so out it goes. Lightly tested. >> >> Regardless, I *will* make time for ripping the feature out if we >> decide to do that. Quick & easy way to avoid reviewing this series >> *hint* *hint*. >> > > well, fwiw, I would also take that approach too, to the risk of upsetting > the users. Reverting the feature requires rough consensus and a patch. I can provide a patch, but let's give everybody a chance to object first. > But maybe we can get a clear reason behind it before that > happens. (sorry, I didn't dig the ML archive is such evidence is there, i= t > should have been in the commit message too) I just did, and found next to nothing. This is the final cover letter: qemu-sockets: add abstract UNIX domain socket support qemu does not support abstract UNIX domain socket address. Add this ability to make qemu handy when abstract address is needed. Boils down to "$feature is needed because it's handy when it's needed", which is less than helpful. Patch history: v1: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2020-04/msg03799.html This version repurposes @path starting with '@' for abstract sockets, always tight. Only connect, no tests, no documentation. R-by Marc-Andr=C3=A9. v2: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2020-04/msg03803.html Minor cleanup. Daniel asks why it's needed, points out listen is missing, and suggests the two boolean flags abstract, tight. v3: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2020-05/msg02291.html Implement interface proposed by Daniel, default of @tight broken, tests (which don't catch the broken default), documentation. Eric suggests QAPI schema doc improvements (but doesn't challenge the interface). R-by Daniel for the code. He asks for randomized @path in tests. v4: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2020-05/msg04036.html Daniel points out style nits in tests. Eric suggests a few more QAPI schema doc improvements. v5: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2020-05/msg04144.html R-by Daniel for the tests. v6: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2020-05/msg04508.html No further review comments. PR: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2020-05/msg05747.html Pull request catches my eye. The interface looks odd, and I challenge @tight. I silently accept Daniel's defense of it without digging deeper. This is a review failure. I do not blame the patch submitter.