Re: [PATCH v9 4/4] vhost: Add a KConfig knob to enable IOCTL VHOST_FORK_FROM_OWNER

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>]

On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 11:34:49AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 6:56 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 11:39:37AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 11:46 AM Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 11:45 AM Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 10:45 AM Cindy Lu <lulu@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Introduce a new config knob `CONFIG_VHOST_ENABLE_FORK_OWNER_IOCTL`,
> > > > > > to control the availability of the `VHOST_FORK_FROM_OWNER` ioctl.
> > > > > > When CONFIG_VHOST_ENABLE_FORK_OWNER_IOCTL is set to n, the ioctl
> > > > > > is disabled, and any attempt to use it will result in failure.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think we need to describe why the default value was chosen to be false.
> > > > >
> > > > > What's more, should we document the implications here?
> > > > >
> > > > > inherit_owner was set to false: this means "legacy" userspace may
> > > >
> > > > I meant "true" actually.
> > >
> > > MIchael, I'd expect inherit_owner to be false. Otherwise legacy
> > > applications need to be modified in order to get the behaviour
> > > recovered which is an impossible taks.
> > >
> > > Any idea on this?
> > >
> > > Thanks

So, let's say we had a modparam? Enough for this customer?
WDYT?

-- 
MST