Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <7034.1532728300@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
References: <153271267980.9458.7640156373438016898.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
 <153271287586.9458.6001928723332685410.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
 <CALCETrUXsOexKcj+K_v_bsW6DkGFgyNOaEs_qVOAcdNGBbEb2w@mail.gmail.com> <7034.1532728300@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
From:   Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Date:   Fri, 27 Jul 2018 14:57:51 -0700
Message-ID: <CALCETrWDGa+ut=xsoki+XFKzdD7KruJJicfH1tKdBtywLuk7iQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 29/38] vfs: syscall: Add fsconfig() for configuring and
 managing a context [ver #10]
To:     David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc:     Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 2:51 PM, David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> wrote:
> Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
>
>> Unless I'm rather confused, you have two or possibly three ways to
>> pass in an open fd.  Can you clarify what the difference is and/or
>> remove all but one of them?
>
> No, they're not equivalent.
>
>> >  (*) fsconfig_set_path: A non-empty path is specified.  The parameter must
>> >      be expecting a path object.  value points to a NUL-terminated string
>> >      that is the path and aux is a file descriptor at which to start a
>> >      relative lookup or AT_FDCWD.
>
> So, an example:
>
>         fsconfig(fd, fsconfig_set_path, "source", "/dev/sda1", AT_FDCWD);
>
> I don't want to require that the caller open /dev/sda1 and pass in an fd as
> that might prevent the filesystem from "holding" it exclusively.
>
>> >  (*) fsconfig_set_path_empty: As fsconfig_set_path, but with AT_EMPTY_PATH
>> >      implied.
>
> You can't do:
>
>         fsconfig(fd, fsconfig_set_path, "source", "", dir_fd);
>
> because AT_EMPTY_PATH cannot be specified directly[*].  What you do instead is:
>
>         fsconfig(fd, fsconfig_set_path_empty, "source", "", dir_fd);
>
> [*] Not without a 6-arg syscall or some other way of passing it.

Are there still architectures that have problems with 6-arg syscalls?

>
> I *could* require that the caller must call open(O_PATH) or openat(O_PATH)
> before calling fsconfig() - so you don't pass a string, but only a path-fd.
>
>> >  (*) fsconfig_set_fd: An open file descriptor is specified.  value must
>> >      be NULL and aux indicates the file descriptor.
>
> See fd=%u on fuse.  I think it's cleaner to do:
>
>         fsconfig(fd, fsconfig_set_fd, "source", NULL, control_fd);
>
> saying explicitly that there's an open file to be passed rather than:
>
>         fsconfig(fd, fsconfig_set_path, "source", NULL, control_fd);

Hmm.  That should probably be clearly documented.  I suppose that, as
long as there is never a case where fsconfig_set_path and
fsconfig_set_fd both succeed, then it's not a big deal.