Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] xen: wrap xenbus on xenfs with COMPAT
 option
To: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <1448919310-27981-1-git-send-email-cardoe@cardoe.com>
 <565D79A2.4060901@citrix.com> <565D79FE.7060309@citrix.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org,
        Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
From: Doug Goldstein <cardoe@cardoe.com>
Message-ID: <565DA473.9030000@cardoe.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 07:45:23 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <565D79FE.7060309@citrix.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature";
 boundary="PQN9no89M6RUtjqGh7CVs7PIgwSbERDmV"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2954
Lines: 74

This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--PQN9no89M6RUtjqGh7CVs7PIgwSbERDmV
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 12/1/15 4:44 AM, David Vrabel wrote:
> On 01/12/15 10:42, David Vrabel wrote:
>> On 30/11/15 21:35, Doug Goldstein wrote:
>>> Since Xen 4.6.0, using xenbus via xenfs (/proc/xen/xenbus) is depreca=
ted
>>> and /dev/xen/xenbus via pvops is used instead. This is an effort to
>>> eventually drop this interface after a reasonable amount of time.
>>
>> I would prefer the ... /proc/xen/evtchn files to be
>=20
> I meant /proc/xen/privcmd here.
>=20
> David
>=20

I can look into that. I do have a few questions, some of which are out
of scope from the original patch.

Would it be preferable to just remove "xenbus" from the xenfs
filesystem? Ever since Linux 3.14 even if you are running a version of
Xen earlier than 4.6 you will not be able to have a disaggregated
xenstore (which is the xenbus consumer) due to the addition of F_ATOMIC_P=
OS.

Is it safe for a kernel virtual filesystem to provide a symlink outside
of itself where the destination can't be verified? Its possible this
already exists and I just don't know off any cases off the top of my head=
=2E

Since the /proc/xen mount point has been marked as COMPAT for nearly 6
years would the eventual goal be to move xenfs to somewhere like
/sys/hypervisor given that most of the virtual filesystems are mounted
under /sys now days?

--=20
Doug Goldstein


--PQN9no89M6RUtjqGh7CVs7PIgwSbERDmV
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0
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=86KV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--PQN9no89M6RUtjqGh7CVs7PIgwSbERDmV--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/