Re: [PATCH V2 0/4] 9p: convert to the new mount API

[Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>]

On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 10:49:48AM +0900, Dominique Martinet wrote:
> Eric Sandeen wrote on Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 11:55:20AM -0500:
> > >> I was able to test this to some degree, but I am not sure how to test
> > >> all transports; there may well be bugs here. It would be great to get
> > >> some feedback on whether this approach seems reasonable, and of course
> > >> any further review or testing would be most welcome.
> > > 
> > > I still want to de-dust my test setup with rdma over siw for lack of
> > > supported hardware, so I'll try to give it a try, but don't necessarily
> > > wait for me as I don't know when that'll be..
> > 
> > Any news on testing? :)
> 
> Thanks for the prompting, that's the kind of things I never get around
> to if not reminded...
> 
> I got this to run with a fedora-based host (unlike debian siw is
> built-in):
> 
> - host side
> ```
> $ sudo modprobe siw
> $ sudo rdma link add siw0 type siw netdev br0
> (sanity check)
> $ ibv_devices
>     device          	  node GUID
>     ------          	----------------
>     siw0            	020000fffe000001
> ( https://github.com/chaos/diod build)
> $ ./configure --enable-rdma --disable-auth && make -j
> (diod run, it runs rdma by default; not squashing as root fails with
>   rdma because of the ib_safe_file_access check:
>   [611503.258375] uverbs_write: process 1490213 (diod) changed security contexts after opening file descriptor, this is not allowed.
> )
> $ sudo ./diod -f -e /tmp/linux-test/ --no-auth -U root -S 
> ```
> - guest side (with -net user)
> ```
> # modprobe siw
> # rdma link add siw0 type siw netdev eth0
> # mount -t 9p -o trans=rdma,aname=/tmp/linux-test <hostip> /mnt
> ```
> 
> I've tested both the new and old mount api (with util-linux mount and
> busybox mount) and it all seems in order to me;
> as discussed in the other part of the thread we're now failing on
> unknown options but I think that's a feature and we can change that if
> someone complains.
> 
> > As for "waiting for you," I assume that's more for your maintainer peers
> > than for me? I'm not sure if this would go through Christian (cc'd) or
> > through you?
> 
> Sorry, I wasn't paying attention and confused you with another Eric
> (Van Hensbergen) who is a 9p maintainer, so I was thinking you'd take
> the patches, but that wasn't correct.
> And that's after seeing your name all the time in #xfs, I'm sorry..
> 
> Christian is "just" a reviewer (for now!), and none of the other
> maintainers pick much up lately, so I'll give this a second look and
> take the patches.

Fyi, Eric (Sandeen) is talking about me, Christian Brauner, whereas you
seem to be thinking of Christian Schoenebeck...