On Thu, Jan 07, 2016 at 10:34:13PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > Wei Liu <wei.l...@citrix.com> writes: > > > Hi all > > > > Back in 2015 summer one of our OPW interns Linda Jacobson explored the > > possibility of making 9pfs work on Xen. It turned out lots of code in QEMU > > can > > be reused. > > > > This series refactors 9pfs related code: > > > > 1. Rename a bunch of files and functions to make clear they are generic. > > 2. Only export two functions (marshal and unmarshal) from transport to > > generic > > code. > > 3. disentangle virtio transport code and generic 9pfs code. > > 4. Some function name clean-up. > > > > To make sure this series doesn't break compilation a rune is use to compile > > every commit. > > > > $ git rebase -i origin/master --exec "make -j16 clean; ./configure > > --target-list=x86_64-softmmu --enable-virtfs --enable-kvm; make -j16 && > > echo ok." > > > > Three use cases are tested: > > > > 1. Local file system driver with passthrough security policy > > ./qemu-system-x86_64 -L . -hda /dev/DATA/jessie -vnc 0.0.0.0:0,to=99 > > -fsdev local,path=/root/qemu,security_model=passthrough,id=fs1 -device > > virtio-9p-pci,fsdev=fs1,mount_tag=qemu & > > > > 2. Local file system driver with mapped security policy > > ./qemu-system-x86_64 -L . -hda /dev/DATA/jessie -vnc 0.0.0.0:0,to=99 -fsdev > > local,path=/root/qemu,security_model=mapped,id=fs1 -device > > virtio-9p-pci,fsdev=fs1,mount_tag=qemu & > > > > 3. Proxy file system driver > > ./virtfs-proxy-helper -p /root/qemu -n -s virtfs-helper-sock -u 0 -g 0 & > > ./qemu-system-x86_64 -L . -hda /dev/DATA/jessie -vnc 0.0.0.0:0,to=99 > > -fsdev proxy,socket=virtfs-helper-sock,id=fs1 -device > > virtio-9p-pci,fsdev=fs1,mount_tag=qemu & > > > > During each of the tests, mounting, unmounting, read and write operations > > are > > performed. In "mapped" test, getfattr in host was used to inspect the > > attributes. > > > > Let me know if you would like to see more tests. > > > you can also try this http://www.tuxera.com/community/posix-test-suite/ > with the xen transport. Are you looking at getting this merged before
Thanks for the info. > the xen transport is done or are we expecting further changes to this > as you make progress with Xen transport ? > I wish to merge this sooner rather than later. It's better to have a cleaner starting point. And as you see, as I rebase this series over time errors are easily introduced. It would also be far easier for you maintainers to review Xen transport alone than reviewing 20+ prerequisite patches plus Xen transport. Interface-wise, I don't expect much to change but I can't say I'm 100% sure. My current thought is that hooking into multiple transport specific locations should be good enough. And this series should cover most cases where hooks are needed. > W.r.t posix test suite with upstream we have one expected failure in the acl > test. You can ignore that. I will also try to get some test run going here. > OK. Wei. > > > > > Xen transport is still under development. I figure it would be better to > > post > > this series as soon as possible because rebasing such huge series from time > > to > > time is prone to error. > > > > Comments are welcome. Thanks! > > Good series with some nice cleanups. > > -aneesh > >