Re: [PATCH v3] 9pfs: deprecate 'proxy' backend

On Wednesday, June 21, 2023 5:28:33 PM CEST Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: [...] > > > I'm fine with deprecating this. In terms of messaging wrt replacements, > > > we should highlight both the 9p 'local' backend, and virtiofsd as the > > > two alternatives. The latter is likely the better choice (on

Re: [PATCH v3] 9pfs: deprecate 'proxy' backend

On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 04:27:04PM +0200, Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > On Wednesday, June 21, 2023 3:46:39 PM CEST Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 10, 2023 at 03:39:44PM +0200, Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > > > +``-fsdev proxy`` and ``-virtfs proxy`` (since 8.1) > > >

Re: [PATCH v3] 9pfs: deprecate 'proxy' backend

On Wed, 21 Jun 2023 16:16:46 +0200 Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > On Wednesday, June 21, 2023 3:41:36 PM CEST Greg Kurz wrote: > > On Wed, 21 Jun 2023 15:32:39 +0200 > > Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > > > > > On Thursday, June 15, 2023 11:35:05 AM CEST Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > > > > On

Re: [PATCH v3] 9pfs: deprecate 'proxy' backend

On Wednesday, June 21, 2023 3:46:39 PM CEST Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Sat, Jun 10, 2023 at 03:39:44PM +0200, Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > > +``-fsdev proxy`` and ``-virtfs proxy`` (since 8.1) > > +^^ > > + > > +The 9p ``proxy`` filesystem

Re: [PATCH v3] 9pfs: deprecate 'proxy' backend

On Wednesday, June 21, 2023 3:41:36 PM CEST Greg Kurz wrote: > On Wed, 21 Jun 2023 15:32:39 +0200 > Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > > > On Thursday, June 15, 2023 11:35:05 AM CEST Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > > > On Saturday, June 10, 2023 3:39:44 PM CEST Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > > > > As

Re: [PATCH v3] 9pfs: deprecate 'proxy' backend

On Sat, Jun 10, 2023 at 03:39:44PM +0200, Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > +``-fsdev proxy`` and ``-virtfs proxy`` (since 8.1) > +^^ > + > +The 9p ``proxy`` filesystem backend driver has been deprecated and will be > +removed in a future version of

Re: [PATCH v3] 9pfs: deprecate 'proxy' backend

On Wed, 21 Jun 2023 15:32:39 +0200 Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > On Thursday, June 15, 2023 11:35:05 AM CEST Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > > On Saturday, June 10, 2023 3:39:44 PM CEST Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > > > As recent CVE-2023-2861 once again showed, the 9p 'proxy' fs driver is in >

Re: [PATCH v3] 9pfs: deprecate 'proxy' backend

On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 11:35:05AM +0200, Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > On Saturday, June 10, 2023 3:39:44 PM CEST Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > > As recent CVE-2023-2861 once again showed, the 9p 'proxy' fs driver is in > > bad shape. Using the 'proxy' backend was already discouraged for safety

Re: [PATCH v3] 9pfs: deprecate 'proxy' backend

On Thursday, June 15, 2023 11:35:05 AM CEST Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > On Saturday, June 10, 2023 3:39:44 PM CEST Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > > As recent CVE-2023-2861 once again showed, the 9p 'proxy' fs driver is in > > bad shape. Using the 'proxy' backend was already discouraged for

Re: [PATCH v3] 9pfs: deprecate 'proxy' backend

On Saturday, June 10, 2023 3:39:44 PM CEST Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > As recent CVE-2023-2861 once again showed, the 9p 'proxy' fs driver is in > bad shape. Using the 'proxy' backend was already discouraged for safety > reasons before and we recommended to use the 'local' backend instead, >

Re: [SPAM] [PATCH v3] 9pfs: deprecate 'proxy' backend

Hi Christian, On Sat, 10 Jun 2023 15:39:44 +0200 Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > As recent CVE-2023-2861 once again showed, the 9p 'proxy' fs driver is in > bad shape. Using the 'proxy' backend was already discouraged for safety > reasons before and we recommended to use the 'local' backend

[PATCH v3] 9pfs: deprecate 'proxy' backend

As recent CVE-2023-2861 once again showed, the 9p 'proxy' fs driver is in bad shape. Using the 'proxy' backend was already discouraged for safety reasons before and we recommended to use the 'local' backend instead, but now it is time to officially deprecate the 'proxy' backend. Signed-off-by: