| Message ID | 20210118192748.584213-4-balsini@android.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | fuse: Add support for passthrough read/write | expand |
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 9:28 PM Alessio Balsini <balsini@android.com> wrote: > > Expose the FUSE_PASSTHROUGH interface to user space and declare all the > basic data structures and functions as the skeleton on top of which the > FUSE passthrough functionality will be built. > > As part of this, introduce the new FUSE passthrough ioctl(), which > allows the FUSE daemon to specify a direct connection between a FUSE > file and a lower file system file. Such ioctl() requires users pace to > pass the file descriptor of one of its opened files through the > fuse_passthrough_out data structure introduced in this patch. This > structure includes extra fields for possible future extensions. > Also, add the passthrough functions for the set-up and tear-down of the > data structures and locks that will be used both when fuse_conns and > fuse_files are created/deleted. > > Signed-off-by: Alessio Balsini <balsini@android.com> > --- [...] > @@ -699,6 +700,7 @@ void fuse_conn_init(struct fuse_conn *fc, struct fuse_mount *fm, > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&fc->bg_queue); > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&fc->entry); > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&fc->devices); > + idr_init(&fc->passthrough_req); > atomic_set(&fc->num_waiting, 0); > fc->max_background = FUSE_DEFAULT_MAX_BACKGROUND; > fc->congestion_threshold = FUSE_DEFAULT_CONGESTION_THRESHOLD; > @@ -1052,6 +1054,12 @@ static void process_init_reply(struct fuse_mount *fm, struct fuse_args *args, > fc->handle_killpriv_v2 = 1; > fm->sb->s_flags |= SB_NOSEC; > } > + if (arg->flags & FUSE_PASSTHROUGH) { > + fc->passthrough = 1; > + /* Prevent further stacking */ > + fm->sb->s_stack_depth = > + FILESYSTEM_MAX_STACK_DEPTH + 1; > + } Hi Allesio, I'm sorry I missed the discussion on v10 patch, but this looks wrong. First of all, assigning a value above a declared MAX_ is misleading and setting a trap for someone else to trip in the future. While this may be just a semantic mistake, the code that checks for (passthrough_sb->s_stack_depth > FILESYSTEM_MAX_STACK_DEPTH) is just cheating. fuse_file_{read,write}_iter are stacked operations, no different in any way than overlayfs and ecryptfs stacked file operations. Peng Tao mentioned a case of passthrough to overlayfs over ecryptfs [1]. If anyone really thinks this use case is interesting enough (I doubt it), then they may propose to bump up FILESYSTEM_MAX_STACK_DEPTH to 3, but not to cheat around the currently defined maximum. So please set s_max_depth to FILESYSTEM_MAX_STACK_DEPTH and restore your v10 check of passthrough_sb->s_stack_depth >= FILESYSTEM_MAX_STACK_DEPTH Your commit message sounds as if the only purpose of this check is to prevent stacking of FUSE passthrough on top of each other, but that is not enough. Thanks, Amir. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/CA+a=Yy6S9spMLr9BqyO1qvU52iAAXU3i9eVtb81SnrzjkCwO5Q@mail.gmail.com/
On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 08:33:16AM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: > On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 9:28 PM Alessio Balsini <balsini@android.com> wrote: > > > > Expose the FUSE_PASSTHROUGH interface to user space and declare all the > > basic data structures and functions as the skeleton on top of which the > > FUSE passthrough functionality will be built. > > > > As part of this, introduce the new FUSE passthrough ioctl(), which > > allows the FUSE daemon to specify a direct connection between a FUSE > > file and a lower file system file. Such ioctl() requires users pace to > > pass the file descriptor of one of its opened files through the > > fuse_passthrough_out data structure introduced in this patch. This > > structure includes extra fields for possible future extensions. > > Also, add the passthrough functions for the set-up and tear-down of the > > data structures and locks that will be used both when fuse_conns and > > fuse_files are created/deleted. > > > > Signed-off-by: Alessio Balsini <balsini@android.com> > > --- > [...] > > > @@ -699,6 +700,7 @@ void fuse_conn_init(struct fuse_conn *fc, struct fuse_mount *fm, > > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&fc->bg_queue); > > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&fc->entry); > > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&fc->devices); > > + idr_init(&fc->passthrough_req); > > atomic_set(&fc->num_waiting, 0); > > fc->max_background = FUSE_DEFAULT_MAX_BACKGROUND; > > fc->congestion_threshold = FUSE_DEFAULT_CONGESTION_THRESHOLD; > > @@ -1052,6 +1054,12 @@ static void process_init_reply(struct fuse_mount *fm, struct fuse_args *args, > > fc->handle_killpriv_v2 = 1; > > fm->sb->s_flags |= SB_NOSEC; > > } > > + if (arg->flags & FUSE_PASSTHROUGH) { > > + fc->passthrough = 1; > > + /* Prevent further stacking */ > > + fm->sb->s_stack_depth = > > + FILESYSTEM_MAX_STACK_DEPTH + 1; > > + } > > Hi Allesio, > > I'm sorry I missed the discussion on v10 patch, but this looks wrong. > First of all, assigning a value above a declared MAX_ is misleading > and setting a trap for someone else to trip in the future. > > While this may be just a semantic mistake, the code that checks for > (passthrough_sb->s_stack_depth > FILESYSTEM_MAX_STACK_DEPTH) > is just cheating. > > fuse_file_{read,write}_iter are stacked operations, no different in any way > than overlayfs and ecryptfs stacked file operations. > > Peng Tao mentioned a case of passthrough to overlayfs over ecryptfs [1]. > If anyone really thinks this use case is interesting enough (I doubt it), then > they may propose to bump up FILESYSTEM_MAX_STACK_DEPTH to 3, > but not to cheat around the currently defined maximum. > > So please set s_max_depth to FILESYSTEM_MAX_STACK_DEPTH and > restore your v10 check of > passthrough_sb->s_stack_depth >= FILESYSTEM_MAX_STACK_DEPTH > > Your commit message sounds as if the only purpose of this check is to > prevent stacking of FUSE passthrough on top of each other, but that > is not enough. > > Thanks, > Amir. > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/CA+a=Yy6S9spMLr9BqyO1qvU52iAAXU3i9eVtb81SnrzjkCwO5Q@mail.gmail.com/ Hi Amir, The stacking solution in V10 works for me and, as we agreed last time, we would still be able to update the stacking policy with FUSE passthrough as soon as some use cases find it beneficial. Our use case in Android is somewhat simple and it's difficult for me to think of how this stacking can be useful or limiting to the different use cases. It's anyway worth highlighting that if FUSE passthrough is disabled, as it is by default, the FUSE behavior remains exactly the same as it was before this series. For my limited use cases experience here, I have no personal preferences on the stacking policy I'm just trying to do the right thing based on the feedback from the community :) I can change this policy back as this was in V10, but at the same time I don't want to put extra effort/confusion in the mailing list and to Miklos with the next patch version. So I'm going to post the diff to bring back the stacking policy as it was in V10 in reply to "[PATCH RESEND V11 4/7] fuse: Passthrough initialization and release" and wait for the community consensus before sending out the V12. Thanks again for helpful feedback! Cheers, Alessio
diff --git a/fs/fuse/Makefile b/fs/fuse/Makefile index 8c7021fb2cd4..20ed23aa16fa 100644 --- a/fs/fuse/Makefile +++ b/fs/fuse/Makefile @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_CUSE) += cuse.o obj-$(CONFIG_VIRTIO_FS) += virtiofs.o fuse-y := dev.o dir.o file.o inode.o control.o xattr.o acl.o readdir.o +fuse-y += passthrough.o fuse-$(CONFIG_FUSE_DAX) += dax.o virtiofs-y := virtio_fs.o diff --git a/fs/fuse/dev.c b/fs/fuse/dev.c index ff9f3b83f879..5446f13db5a0 100644 --- a/fs/fuse/dev.c +++ b/fs/fuse/dev.c @@ -2236,6 +2236,7 @@ static long fuse_dev_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, int res; int oldfd; struct fuse_dev *fud = NULL; + struct fuse_passthrough_out pto; if (_IOC_TYPE(cmd) != FUSE_DEV_IOC_MAGIC) return -EINVAL; @@ -2266,6 +2267,17 @@ static long fuse_dev_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, } } break; + case _IOC_NR(FUSE_DEV_IOC_PASSTHROUGH_OPEN): + res = -EFAULT; + if (!copy_from_user(&pto, + (struct fuse_passthrough_out __user *)arg, + sizeof(pto))) { + res = -EINVAL; + fud = fuse_get_dev(file); + if (fud) + res = fuse_passthrough_open(fud, &pto); + } + break; default: res = -ENOTTY; break; diff --git a/fs/fuse/dir.c b/fs/fuse/dir.c index 78f9f209078c..c9a1b33c5481 100644 --- a/fs/fuse/dir.c +++ b/fs/fuse/dir.c @@ -513,6 +513,7 @@ static int fuse_create_open(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *entry, { int err; struct inode *inode; + struct fuse_conn *fc = get_fuse_conn(dir); struct fuse_mount *fm = get_fuse_mount(dir); FUSE_ARGS(args); struct fuse_forget_link *forget; @@ -574,6 +575,7 @@ static int fuse_create_open(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *entry, ff->fh = outopen.fh; ff->nodeid = outentry.nodeid; ff->open_flags = outopen.open_flags; + fuse_passthrough_setup(fc, ff, &outopen); inode = fuse_iget(dir->i_sb, outentry.nodeid, outentry.generation, &outentry.attr, entry_attr_timeout(&outentry), 0); if (!inode) { diff --git a/fs/fuse/file.c b/fs/fuse/file.c index 8cccecb55fb8..953f3034c375 100644 --- a/fs/fuse/file.c +++ b/fs/fuse/file.c @@ -158,7 +158,7 @@ int fuse_do_open(struct fuse_mount *fm, u64 nodeid, struct file *file, if (!err) { ff->fh = outarg.fh; ff->open_flags = outarg.open_flags; - + fuse_passthrough_setup(fc, ff, &outarg); } else if (err != -ENOSYS) { fuse_file_free(ff); return err; @@ -304,6 +304,8 @@ void fuse_release_common(struct file *file, bool isdir) struct fuse_release_args *ra = ff->release_args; int opcode = isdir ? FUSE_RELEASEDIR : FUSE_RELEASE; + fuse_passthrough_release(&ff->passthrough); + fuse_prepare_release(fi, ff, file->f_flags, opcode); if (ff->flock) { diff --git a/fs/fuse/fuse_i.h b/fs/fuse/fuse_i.h index 7c4b8cb93f9f..8d39f5304a11 100644 --- a/fs/fuse/fuse_i.h +++ b/fs/fuse/fuse_i.h @@ -180,6 +180,14 @@ struct fuse_conn; struct fuse_mount; struct fuse_release_args; +/** + * Reference to lower filesystem file for read/write operations handled in + * passthrough mode + */ +struct fuse_passthrough { + struct file *filp; +}; + /** FUSE specific file data */ struct fuse_file { /** Fuse connection for this file */ @@ -225,6 +233,9 @@ struct fuse_file { } readdir; + /** Container for data related to the passthrough functionality */ + struct fuse_passthrough passthrough; + /** RB node to be linked on fuse_conn->polled_files */ struct rb_node polled_node; @@ -755,6 +766,9 @@ struct fuse_conn { /* Auto-mount submounts announced by the server */ unsigned int auto_submounts:1; + /** Passthrough mode for read/write IO */ + unsigned int passthrough:1; + /** The number of requests waiting for completion */ atomic_t num_waiting; @@ -798,6 +812,12 @@ struct fuse_conn { /** List of filesystems using this connection */ struct list_head mounts; + + /** IDR for passthrough requests */ + struct idr passthrough_req; + + /** Protects passthrough_req */ + spinlock_t passthrough_req_lock; }; /* @@ -1213,4 +1233,11 @@ void fuse_dax_inode_cleanup(struct inode *inode); bool fuse_dax_check_alignment(struct fuse_conn *fc, unsigned int map_alignment); void fuse_dax_cancel_work(struct fuse_conn *fc); +/* passthrough.c */ +int fuse_passthrough_open(struct fuse_dev *fud, + struct fuse_passthrough_out *pto); +int fuse_passthrough_setup(struct fuse_conn *fc, struct fuse_file *ff, + struct fuse_open_out *openarg); +void fuse_passthrough_release(struct fuse_passthrough *passthrough); + #endif /* _FS_FUSE_I_H */ diff --git a/fs/fuse/inode.c b/fs/fuse/inode.c index b0e18b470e91..d5c46eafb419 100644 --- a/fs/fuse/inode.c +++ b/fs/fuse/inode.c @@ -691,6 +691,7 @@ void fuse_conn_init(struct fuse_conn *fc, struct fuse_mount *fm, memset(fc, 0, sizeof(*fc)); spin_lock_init(&fc->lock); spin_lock_init(&fc->bg_lock); + spin_lock_init(&fc->passthrough_req_lock); init_rwsem(&fc->killsb); refcount_set(&fc->count, 1); atomic_set(&fc->dev_count, 1); @@ -699,6 +700,7 @@ void fuse_conn_init(struct fuse_conn *fc, struct fuse_mount *fm, INIT_LIST_HEAD(&fc->bg_queue); INIT_LIST_HEAD(&fc->entry); INIT_LIST_HEAD(&fc->devices); + idr_init(&fc->passthrough_req); atomic_set(&fc->num_waiting, 0); fc->max_background = FUSE_DEFAULT_MAX_BACKGROUND; fc->congestion_threshold = FUSE_DEFAULT_CONGESTION_THRESHOLD; @@ -1052,6 +1054,12 @@ static void process_init_reply(struct fuse_mount *fm, struct fuse_args *args, fc->handle_killpriv_v2 = 1; fm->sb->s_flags |= SB_NOSEC; } + if (arg->flags & FUSE_PASSTHROUGH) { + fc->passthrough = 1; + /* Prevent further stacking */ + fm->sb->s_stack_depth = + FILESYSTEM_MAX_STACK_DEPTH + 1; + } } else { ra_pages = fc->max_read / PAGE_SIZE; fc->no_lock = 1; @@ -1095,7 +1103,7 @@ void fuse_send_init(struct fuse_mount *fm) FUSE_PARALLEL_DIROPS | FUSE_HANDLE_KILLPRIV | FUSE_POSIX_ACL | FUSE_ABORT_ERROR | FUSE_MAX_PAGES | FUSE_CACHE_SYMLINKS | FUSE_NO_OPENDIR_SUPPORT | FUSE_EXPLICIT_INVAL_DATA | - FUSE_HANDLE_KILLPRIV_V2; + FUSE_HANDLE_KILLPRIV_V2 | FUSE_PASSTHROUGH; #ifdef CONFIG_FUSE_DAX if (fm->fc->dax) ia->in.flags |= FUSE_MAP_ALIGNMENT; @@ -1123,9 +1131,16 @@ void fuse_send_init(struct fuse_mount *fm) } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(fuse_send_init); +static int free_fuse_passthrough(int id, void *p, void *data) +{ + return 0; +} + void fuse_free_conn(struct fuse_conn *fc) { WARN_ON(!list_empty(&fc->devices)); + idr_for_each(&fc->passthrough_req, free_fuse_passthrough, NULL); + idr_destroy(&fc->passthrough_req); kfree_rcu(fc, rcu); } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(fuse_free_conn); diff --git a/fs/fuse/passthrough.c b/fs/fuse/passthrough.c new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..594060c654f8 --- /dev/null +++ b/fs/fuse/passthrough.c @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@ +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 + +#include "fuse_i.h" + +#include <linux/fuse.h> + +int fuse_passthrough_open(struct fuse_dev *fud, + struct fuse_passthrough_out *pto) +{ + return -EINVAL; +} + +int fuse_passthrough_setup(struct fuse_conn *fc, struct fuse_file *ff, + struct fuse_open_out *openarg) +{ + return -EINVAL; +} + +void fuse_passthrough_release(struct fuse_passthrough *passthrough) +{ +} diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/fuse.h b/include/uapi/linux/fuse.h index 54442612c48b..9d7685ce0acd 100644 --- a/include/uapi/linux/fuse.h +++ b/include/uapi/linux/fuse.h @@ -360,6 +360,7 @@ struct fuse_file_lock { #define FUSE_MAP_ALIGNMENT (1 << 26) #define FUSE_SUBMOUNTS (1 << 27) #define FUSE_HANDLE_KILLPRIV_V2 (1 << 28) +#define FUSE_PASSTHROUGH (1 << 29) /** * CUSE INIT request/reply flags @@ -625,7 +626,7 @@ struct fuse_create_in { struct fuse_open_out { uint64_t fh; uint32_t open_flags; - uint32_t padding; + uint32_t passthrough_fh; }; struct fuse_release_in { @@ -828,6 +829,13 @@ struct fuse_in_header { uint32_t padding; }; +struct fuse_passthrough_out { + uint32_t fd; + /* For future implementation */ + uint32_t len; + void *vec; +}; + struct fuse_out_header { uint32_t len; int32_t error; @@ -905,6 +913,7 @@ struct fuse_notify_retrieve_in { /* Device ioctls: */ #define FUSE_DEV_IOC_MAGIC 229 #define FUSE_DEV_IOC_CLONE _IOR(FUSE_DEV_IOC_MAGIC, 0, uint32_t) +#define FUSE_DEV_IOC_PASSTHROUGH_OPEN _IOW(FUSE_DEV_IOC_MAGIC, 1, struct fuse_passthrough_out) struct fuse_lseek_in { uint64_t fh;
Expose the FUSE_PASSTHROUGH interface to user space and declare all the basic data structures and functions as the skeleton on top of which the FUSE passthrough functionality will be built. As part of this, introduce the new FUSE passthrough ioctl(), which allows the FUSE daemon to specify a direct connection between a FUSE file and a lower file system file. Such ioctl() requires users pace to pass the file descriptor of one of its opened files through the fuse_passthrough_out data structure introduced in this patch. This structure includes extra fields for possible future extensions. Also, add the passthrough functions for the set-up and tear-down of the data structures and locks that will be used both when fuse_conns and fuse_files are created/deleted. Signed-off-by: Alessio Balsini <balsini@android.com> --- fs/fuse/Makefile | 1 + fs/fuse/dev.c | 12 ++++++++++++ fs/fuse/dir.c | 2 ++ fs/fuse/file.c | 4 +++- fs/fuse/fuse_i.h | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ fs/fuse/inode.c | 17 ++++++++++++++++- fs/fuse/passthrough.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ include/uapi/linux/fuse.h | 11 ++++++++++- 8 files changed, 92 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) create mode 100644 fs/fuse/passthrough.c