[PATCH] kvm_config: add CONFIG_VIRTIO_FS

[PATCH] kvm_config: add CONFIG_VIRTIO_FS

[Brendan Jackman]

This is used for VMs, so add it. It depends on FUSE_FS for the
implementation.

Signed-off-by: Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>
---
 kernel/configs/kvm_guest.config | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/kernel/configs/kvm_guest.config b/kernel/configs/kvm_guest.config
index d0877063d925cd6db3136c9efd175669c1317131..86abe9de33bb2378ba0f7d46dbe4d84b49835506 100644
--- a/kernel/configs/kvm_guest.config
+++ b/kernel/configs/kvm_guest.config
@@ -33,3 +33,5 @@ CONFIG_SCSI_LOWLEVEL=y
 CONFIG_SCSI_VIRTIO=y
 CONFIG_VIRTIO_INPUT=y
 CONFIG_DRM_VIRTIO_GPU=y
+CONFIG_FUSE_FS=y
+CONFIG_VIRTIO_FS=y

---
base-commit: eabcdba3ad4098460a376538df2ae36500223c1e
change-id: 20241220-kvm-config-virtiofs-64031a11144f

Best regards,
-- 
Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>

Re: [PATCH] kvm_config: add CONFIG_VIRTIO_FS

[Brendan Jackman]

On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 at 15:07, Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com> wrote:
>
> This is used for VMs, so add it. It depends on FUSE_FS for the
> implementation.

[Apologies for the duplicate mail, seems I accidentally switched HTML
on in my GMail]

Hi Paolo, happy new year. In the cold light of January I'm realising
this is not really a "KVM change" so sending it to you was a bit of a
random choice.

But, it does say "KVM" in the name and nobody in particular seems to
own it... so... what do you think?

Re: [PATCH] kvm_config: add CONFIG_VIRTIO_FS

[Christian Borntraeger]

Am 20.12.24 um 15:07 schrieb Brendan Jackman:
> This is used for VMs, so add it. It depends on FUSE_FS for the
> implementation.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>

I think this makes sense given the usecases of make kvm_config.
As of today we select 9pfs and virtiofs is clearly the better choice.

Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>


> ---
>   kernel/configs/kvm_guest.config | 2 ++
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/configs/kvm_guest.config b/kernel/configs/kvm_guest.config
> index d0877063d925cd6db3136c9efd175669c1317131..86abe9de33bb2378ba0f7d46dbe4d84b49835506 100644
> --- a/kernel/configs/kvm_guest.config
> +++ b/kernel/configs/kvm_guest.config
> @@ -33,3 +33,5 @@ CONFIG_SCSI_LOWLEVEL=y
>   CONFIG_SCSI_VIRTIO=y
>   CONFIG_VIRTIO_INPUT=y
>   CONFIG_DRM_VIRTIO_GPU=y
> +CONFIG_FUSE_FS=y
> +CONFIG_VIRTIO_FS=y
> 
> ---
> base-commit: eabcdba3ad4098460a376538df2ae36500223c1e
> change-id: 20241220-kvm-config-virtiofs-64031a11144f
> 
> Best regards,

Re: [PATCH] kvm_config: add CONFIG_VIRTIO_FS

[Brendan Jackman]

Hi Heiko/Vasily/Alexander,

I don't see any obvious choice for a maintainer who would merge this.

On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 at 13:46, Christian Borntraeger
<borntraeger@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>

Given that Christian acked it, and it's pretty low-stakes and unlikely
to conflict, would you perhaps take it through the S390 tree?

Thanks,
Brendan

Re: [PATCH] kvm_config: add CONFIG_VIRTIO_FS

[Heiko Carstens]

On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 11:06:56AM +0100, Brendan Jackman wrote:
> Hi Heiko/Vasily/Alexander,
> 
> I don't see any obvious choice for a maintainer who would merge this.
> 
> On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 at 13:46, Christian Borntraeger
> <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> > Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> 
> Given that Christian acked it, and it's pretty low-stakes and unlikely
> to conflict, would you perhaps take it through the S390 tree?

Given that this is kvm specific I would prefer if this goes via a kvm
specific tree. E.g. kvm-s390 :) Which means Christian, Janosch, or
Claudio should pick this up.

Re: [PATCH] kvm_config: add CONFIG_VIRTIO_FS

[Paolo Bonzini]

On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 11:27 AM Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 11:06:56AM +0100, Brendan Jackman wrote:
> > Hi Heiko/Vasily/Alexander,
> >
> > I don't see any obvious choice for a maintainer who would merge this.
> >
> > On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 at 13:46, Christian Borntraeger
> > <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> >
> > Given that Christian acked it, and it's pretty low-stakes and unlikely
> > to conflict, would you perhaps take it through the S390 tree?
>
> Given that this is kvm specific I would prefer if this goes via a kvm
> specific tree. E.g. kvm-s390 :) Which means Christian, Janosch, or
> Claudio should pick this up.

I will apply it to the main KVM tree.

Paolo