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 A4316C433F5 for ; Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:16:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:50078 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nh9GB-00073T-K2 for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Wed, 20 Apr 2022 08:16:39 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49082) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nh98r-0003uU-S1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 20 Apr 2022 08:09:05 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-44.mimecast.com ([205.139.111.44]:40856) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nh98q-0006Ei-D9 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 20 Apr 2022 08:09:05 -0400 Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mx3-rdu2.redhat.com [66.187.233.73]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-118-n7qscaryOxKb-tE9qcOq5w-1; Wed, 20 Apr 2022 08:08:58 -0400 X-MC-Unique: n7qscaryOxKb-tE9qcOq5w-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.8]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 063503C025B3; Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:08:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bahia (unknown [10.39.192.98]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEF8FDCC485; Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:08:56 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 14:08:55 +0200 From: Greg Kurz To: Christian Schoenebeck Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] 9pfs: fix qemu_mknodat(S_IFSOCK) on macOS Message-ID: <20220420140855.18069bd9@bahia> In-Reply-To: <2487103.vv5bNdeIv8@silver> References: <2e88acab7b3f998ceff7232b5e3d6a8a6d2a6f8b.1650370026.git.qemu_oss@crudebyte.com> <20220420110946.3dbe6f50@bahia> <2487103.vv5bNdeIv8@silver> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.85 on 10.11.54.8 Received-SPF: softfail client-ip=205.139.111.44; envelope-from=groug@kaod.org; helo=us-smtp-delivery-44.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=no 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: , Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-stable@nongnu.org, Keno Fischer , Michael Roitzsch , Will Cohen , Akihiko Odaki Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:28:01 +0200 Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > On Mittwoch, 20. April 2022 11:09:46 CEST Greg Kurz wrote: > > On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 13:41:03 +0200 > > > > Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > > > mknod() on macOS does not support creating sockets, so divert to > > > call sequence socket(), bind() and chmod() respectively if S_IFSOCK > > > was passed with mode argument. > > > > Hmm... thinking again about this one : QEMU on linux calls the libc > > version of mknodat() which doesn't seem to support S_IFSOCK according > > to the mknod(3P) manual page. So I'm not sure there's something to > > be actually fixed here... what's the observed behavior on linux ? > > It's unclear to me where you got that from. In all Linux man pages I looked up > so far it said S_IFSOCK was supported. But I also tested this now with > security_model=none on a Linux host and it works as expected, i.e. it creates > a file of type socket on the Linux host filesystem. > > We are really talking about a Linux host, right? > Yes but you can forget this remark. I've checked the glibc sources and it directly calls the syscall... I guess I got confused by the mknod(3P) manual page. Sorry for the noise :-) > Best regards, > Christian Schoenebeck > >