mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Cc: Bernd Schubert <bschubert@ddn.com>,
	Dharmendra Hans <dharamhans87@gmail.com>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	fuse-devel <fuse-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] FUSE: Implement atomic lookup + open/create
Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 13:21:13 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YnvwiZ+s+y3VDUMW@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJfpegseGaWHkjdQj7XiR=TQNFpPZzDF_rTXces2oRz=x0N7OA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 11:40:59AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Thu, 5 May 2022 at 21:59, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > Oh, I have no issues with the intent. I will like to see cut in network
> > traffic too (if we can do this without introducing problems). My primary
> > interest is that this kind of change should benefit virtiofs as well.
> 
> One issue with that appears to be checking permissions.   AFAIU this
> patchset only enables the optimization if default_permissions is
> turned off (i.e. all permission checking is done by the server).  But
> virtiofs uses the default_permissions model.

IIUC, only 3rd patch mentions that default_permission should be turned
off. IOW, first patch where lookup + create + open is a single operation
and second patch which does "lookup + open" in a single operation does
not seem to require that default_permissions are not in effect.

So if first two patches work fine, I think virtiofs should benefit too.
(IMHO, 3rd patch is too hacky anyway)

W.r.t permission checks, looks like may_open() will finally be called
after ->atomic_open(). So even if we open the file, we should still be
able to check whether we have permissions to open the file or not
after the fact.

fs/namei.c

path_openat()
{
	open_last_lookups()  <--- This calls ->atomic_open()
	do_open()  <--- This calls may_open()
}

Thanks
Vivek

> 
> I'm not quite sure about this limitation, guessing that it's related
> to the fact that the permissions may be stale at the time of checking?
> 
> Thanks,
> Miklos
> 


  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-05-11 17:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-05-02 10:25 Dharmendra Singh
2022-05-02 10:25 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] FUSE: Implement atomic lookup + create Dharmendra Singh
2022-05-03 12:43   ` Vivek Goyal
2022-05-03 14:13   ` Vivek Goyal
2022-05-03 19:53   ` Vivek Goyal
2022-05-03 20:48     ` Bernd Schubert
2022-05-04  4:26     ` Dharmendra Hans
2022-05-04 14:47       ` Vivek Goyal
2022-05-04 15:46         ` Bernd Schubert
2022-05-04 17:31           ` Vivek Goyal
2022-05-05  4:51         ` Dharmendra Hans
2022-05-05 14:26           ` Vivek Goyal
2022-05-06  5:34             ` Dharmendra Hans
2022-05-06 14:12               ` Vivek Goyal
2022-05-06 16:41                 ` Bernd Schubert
2022-05-06 17:07                   ` Vivek Goyal
2022-05-06 18:45                     ` Bernd Schubert
2022-05-07 10:42                       ` Jean-Pierre André
2022-05-11 10:08                         ` Bernd Schubert
2022-05-02 10:25 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] FUSE: Implement atomic lookup + open Dharmendra Singh
2022-05-04 18:20   ` Vivek Goyal
2022-05-05  6:39     ` Dharmendra Hans
2022-05-02 10:25 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] FUSE: Avoid lookup in d_revalidate() Dharmendra Singh
2022-05-04 20:39   ` Vivek Goyal
2022-05-04 21:05     ` Bernd Schubert
2022-05-05  5:49     ` Dharmendra Hans
2022-05-04 19:18 ` [PATCH v4 0/3] FUSE: Implement atomic lookup + open/create Vivek Goyal
2022-05-05  6:12   ` Dharmendra Hans
2022-05-05 12:54     ` Vivek Goyal
2022-05-05 15:13       ` Bernd Schubert
2022-05-05 19:59         ` Vivek Goyal
2022-05-11  9:40           ` Miklos Szeredi
2022-05-11  9:59             ` Bernd Schubert
2022-05-11 17:21             ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2022-05-11 19:30               ` Vivek Goyal
2022-05-12  8:16                 ` Dharmendra Hans
2022-05-12 15:24                   ` Vivek Goyal

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=YnvwiZ+s+y3VDUMW@redhat.com \
    --to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    --cc=bschubert@ddn.com \
    --cc=dharamhans87@gmail.com \
    --cc=fuse-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome