On Fri, 21 May 2021 10:50:34 +0200 Miklos Szeredi <mik...@szeredi.hu> wrote:
> On Fri, 21 May 2021 at 10:39, Greg Kurz <gr...@kaod.org> wrote: > > > > On Fri, 21 May 2021 10:26:27 +0200 > > Miklos Szeredi <mik...@szeredi.hu> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 20 May 2021 at 17:47, Greg Kurz <gr...@kaod.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > All submounts share the same virtio-fs device instance as the root > > > > mount. If the same virtiofs filesystem is mounted again, sget_fc() > > > > is likely to pick up any of these submounts and reuse it instead of > > > > the root mount. > > > > > > > > On the server side: > > > > > > > > # mkdir ${some_dir} > > > > # mkdir ${some_dir}/mnt1 > > > > # mount -t tmpfs none ${some_dir}/mnt1 > > > > # touch ${some_dir}/mnt1/THIS_IS_MNT1 > > > > # mkdir ${some_dir}/mnt2 > > > > # mount -t tmpfs none ${some_dir}/mnt2 > > > > # touch ${some_dir}/mnt2/THIS_IS_MNT2 > > > > > > > > On the client side: > > > > > > > > # mkdir /mnt/virtiofs1 > > > > # mount -t virtiofs myfs /mnt/virtiofs1 > > > > # ls /mnt/virtiofs1 > > > > mnt1 mnt2 > > > > # grep virtiofs /proc/mounts > > > > myfs /mnt/virtiofs1 virtiofs rw,seclabel,relatime 0 0 > > > > none on /mnt/mnt1 type virtiofs (rw,relatime,seclabel) > > > > none on /mnt/mnt2 type virtiofs (rw,relatime,seclabel) > > > > > > > > And now remount it again: > > > > > > > > # mount -t virtiofs myfs /mnt/virtiofs2 > > > > # grep virtiofs /proc/mounts > > > > myfs /mnt/virtiofs1 virtiofs rw,seclabel,relatime 0 0 > > > > none on /mnt/mnt1 type virtiofs (rw,relatime,seclabel) > > > > none on /mnt/mnt2 type virtiofs (rw,relatime,seclabel) > > > > myfs /mnt/virtiofs2 virtiofs rw,seclabel,relatime 0 0 > > > > # ls /mnt/virtiofs2 > > > > THIS_IS_MNT2 > > > > > > > > Submount mnt2 was picked-up instead of the root mount. > > > > > > > > Why is this a problem? > > > > > > > It seems very weird to mount the same filesystem again > > and to end up in one of its submounts. We should have: > > > > # ls /mnt/virtiofs2 > > mnt1 mnt2 > > Okay, sorry, I understand the problem. The solution is wrong, > however: the position of the submount on that list is no indication > that it's the right one (it's possible that the root sb will go away > and only a sub-sb will remain). > Ah... I had myself convinced this could not happen, i.e. you can't unmount a parent sb with a sub-sb still mounted. How can this happen ? > Even just setting a flag in the root, indicating that it's the root > isn't fully going to solve the problem. > > Here's issue in full: > > case 1: no connection for "myfs" exists > - need to create fuse_conn, sb > > case 2: connection for "myfs" exists but only sb for submount How would we know this sb isn't a root sb ? > - only create sb for root, reuse fuse_conn > > case 3: connection for "myfs" as well as root sb exists > - reuse sb > > I'll think about how to fix this properly, it's probably going to be > rather more involved... > Sure. BTW I'm wondering why we never reuse sbs for submounts ? > Thanks, > Miklos _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization