From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 AA7F8324B31 for ; Thu, 26 Mar 2026 22:33:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1774564420; cv=none; b=ThjIYNo8uw4/RbsbZHRNu/Zv06imEJTWIv54r9DwYR+isOF+ZYMOaI7RS5joyep305SOFdF3ZX5U3w+/XHqxelCMzCrNe45TjzPVLuw8LzN5MjIMbYrf5Sl8GQf6mIxpmXC0zeLP0kaNfHRMO3/q2OoCKf85W1/OK8nwiEzS4F4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1774564420; c=relaxed/simple; bh=C+3Y7JW83WkyCE2HcoUwZdvcZTenbTyn36DJJ/n7vJE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=GcVfJq+eO4+PPAkVZli40gCOsI+cM8AL/pBd/BN+QhPZm7devtTtFqJ/faH/1gvKYVh2sOVXyG8v5SFdOGQh3LZWJ5904DpFZa9mQruskvUy3supEd0Jnuvi7ZqLgecFyR7O0wa5iu4amhjxU7a2QwV4Ko3TPvT7u1f+oSfDLBk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=OgnPQHFv; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="OgnPQHFv" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 29C9DC116C6; Thu, 26 Mar 2026 22:33:40 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1774564420; bh=C+3Y7JW83WkyCE2HcoUwZdvcZTenbTyn36DJJ/n7vJE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=OgnPQHFv6Jl6DSwQ5bjECExGcQh5tGJIuXe0Q5Hhjs+oV3E/hUPYE2OqJjHnA8jK8 8e+PbtEezpIJKgq0tbNm4lR2Fs660zIQTXn/LJ/xcEoAK2yTDTxj2zgKmISKdaOny8 qTEqyio2obqkTqjF23Tcqptf/XukadTeHJMGUyROt39l/5GSqsXSxZ1LvLvI2Irscj uHctpwHeyUgG6KOZXeZpguocW3SUmIS3I7mKMwEaL6wZFx6yomsp6V/j7CSMu8hvlP OwdQ+BQviUOkWBF25/q08dmIGZrCwYHrQR0u9NaFSyGpE6ffT/pYmRUufCfnwwAhBY NGDio15MBCJ0Q== Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2026 15:33:39 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: Bernd Schubert Cc: Bernd Schubert , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , Miklos Szeredi , Joanne Koong , Kevin Chen Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/19] fuse mount: Support synchronous FUSE_INIT (privileged daemon) Message-ID: <20260326223339.GE6254@frogsfrogsfrogs> References: <20260323-fuse-init-before-mount-v1-0-a52d3040af69@bsbernd.com> <20260323-fuse-init-before-mount-v1-12-a52d3040af69@bsbernd.com> <20260324000350.GM6202@frogsfrogsfrogs> <20260324225012.GY6202@frogsfrogsfrogs> <4fd3c5e8-89e0-4356-ab50-4aa7544a142f@ddn.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4fd3c5e8-89e0-4356-ab50-4aa7544a142f@ddn.com> On Thu, Mar 26, 2026 at 08:32:23PM +0100, Bernd Schubert wrote: > > > On 3/24/26 23:50, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 08:42:36PM +0000, Bernd Schubert wrote: > >> On 3/24/26 01:03, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > >> Next on my list is to look into the fuse-io-uring issues that Kevin also > >> reports with this patch series. > > > > Heh, well, at least it isn't pthread_cancel anymore :) > > > So the ugly part here is that one needs to call fuse_daemonize_success() > success twice. Once from ->init() and once after fuse_session_mount(). > fuse_daemonize_success() will then check itself if this is sync-init or > async init. Making it conditional in the daemon code itself would be > possible, but it would need two different api calls. ->init() gets > fuse_conn_info and main() or whatever created the session has 'struct > fuse_session'. > Issue here was that I had fuse_daemonize_success() in ->init (sfs_init) > and it signaled the parent that the mount was completed before it was > actually complete with sync init. With io-uring another 300ms delay to > create the rings - enough to make xfstests to fail. Huh. What failure did you get? Is this the kernel trying to send commands and failing because fuse_uring_wake_ring_threads hasn't been done yet? I see you've posted your new patchset so I'll go hunt through there. --D > With that change of behavior I'm not even sure anymore if we can make > sync init a default. > > Currently have xfstests running (also testing the reduced queue patches > with that) and will sent out new patches one that completes. > > Cheers, > Bernd