Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:8 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:8;
Feedback-ID: i31e841b0:Fastmail
Message-ID: <fa1e43f4-c703-762e-1b65-bd2c30e0cd3e@themaw.net>
Date:   Tue, 31 Oct 2023 10:04:48 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.13.0
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Bill O'Donnell <bodonnel@redhat.com>
References: <20231027-vfs-autofs-018bbf11ed67@brauner>
 <43ea4439-8cb9-8b0d-5e04-3bd5e85530f4@themaw.net>
 <20231030-imponieren-tierzucht-1d1ef70bce3f@brauner>
From:   Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL for v6.7] autofs updates
In-Reply-To: <20231030-imponieren-tierzucht-1d1ef70bce3f@brauner>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 30/10/23 18:24, Christian Brauner wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 29, 2023 at 03:54:52PM +0800, Ian Kent wrote:
>> On 27/10/23 22:33, Christian Brauner wrote:
>>> Hey Linus,
>>>
>>> /* Summary */
>>> This ports autofs to the new mount api. The patchset has existed for
>>> quite a while but never made it upstream. Ian picked it back up.
>>>
>>> This also fixes a bug where fs_param_is_fd() was passed a garbage
>>> param->dirfd but it expected it to be set to the fd that was used to set
>>> param->file otherwise result->uint_32 contains nonsense. So make sure
>>> it's set.
>>>
>>> One less filesystem using the old mount api. We're getting there, albeit
>>> rather slow. The last remaining major filesystem that hasn't converted
>>> is btrfs. Patches exist - I even wrote them - but so far they haven't
>>> made it upstream.
>> Yes, looks like about 39 still to be converted.
>>
>>
>> Just for information, excluding btrfs, what would you like to see as the
>>
>> priority for conversion (in case me or any of my colleagues get a chance
>>
>> to spend a bit more time on it)?
> I think one way to prioritize them is by how likely they are to have
> (more than a couple) active users.
>
> So recently I've done overlayfs because aside from btrfs that was
> probably one of the really actively used filesystems that hadn't yet
> been converted. And that did surface some regression
>
> So 9p, fat, devpts, f2fs, zonefs, ext2 are pretty obvious targets.
> Judging from experience, the more mount options a filesystem has the
> bigger the conversion patch will usually be.
>
> Another way is by function. For example, we expose mount_bdev() which is
> basically the legacy version of get_tree_bdev(). And they sort of are
> almost copies of each other. So converting all callers to the new mount
> api means we can get rid of mount_bdev(). But that's like 25 of the
> remaining 39.
>
> But in the end any filesystem that is converted is great.

Thanks Christian, I know Bill was considering spending a bit of time on

this and I may have some cycles myself in the not too distant future. But

things change all too quickly so we'll need to see how it goes, ;)


Ian


I'll