lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Sep]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH V8 1/3] fuse: Definitions and ioctl() for passthrough
On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 7:34 PM Alessio Balsini <balsini@android.com> wrote:
>
> Introduce the new FUSE passthrough ioctl(), which allows userspace to
> specify a direct connection between a FUSE file and a lower file system
> file.
> Such ioctl() requires userspace to specify:
> - the file descriptor of one of its opened files,
> - the unique identifier of the FUSE request associated with a pending
> open/create operation,
> both encapsulated into a fuse_passthrough_out data structure.
> The ioctl() will search for the pending FUSE request matching the unique
> identifier, and update the passthrough file pointer of the request with the
> file pointer referenced by the passed file descriptor.
> When that pending FUSE request is handled, the passthrough file pointer
> is copied to the fuse_file data structure, so that the link between FUSE
> and lower file system is consolidated.
>
> In order for the passthrough mode to be successfully activated, the lower
> file system file must implement both read_ and write_iter file operations.
> This extra check avoids special pseudofiles to be targets for this feature.
> An additional enforced limitation is that when FUSE passthrough is enabled,
> no further file system stacking is allowed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alessio Balsini <balsini@android.com>
> ---
[...]
> diff --git a/fs/fuse/inode.c b/fs/fuse/inode.c
> index bba747520e9b..eb223130a917 100644
> --- a/fs/fuse/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/fuse/inode.c
> @@ -965,6 +965,12 @@ static void process_init_reply(struct fuse_conn *fc, struct fuse_args *args,
> min_t(unsigned int, FUSE_MAX_MAX_PAGES,
> max_t(unsigned int, arg->max_pages, 1));
> }
> + if (arg->flags & FUSE_PASSTHROUGH) {
> + fc->passthrough = 1;
> + /* Prevent further stacking */
> + fc->sb->s_stack_depth =
> + FILESYSTEM_MAX_STACK_DEPTH;
> + }

That seems a bit limiting.
I suppose what you really want to avoid is loops into FUSE fd.
There may be a way to do this with forbidding overlay over FUSE passthrough
or the other way around.

You can set fc->sb->s_stack_depth = FILESYSTEM_MAX_STACK_DEPTH - 1
here and in passthrough ioctl you can check for looping into a fuse fs with
passthrough enabled on the passed fd (see below) ...


> } else {
> ra_pages = fc->max_read / PAGE_SIZE;
> fc->no_lock = 1;
> @@ -1002,7 +1008,8 @@ void fuse_send_init(struct fuse_conn *fc)
> FUSE_WRITEBACK_CACHE | FUSE_NO_OPEN_SUPPORT |
> 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_NO_OPENDIR_SUPPORT | FUSE_EXPLICIT_INVAL_DATA |
> + FUSE_PASSTHROUGH;
> ia->args.opcode = FUSE_INIT;
> ia->args.in_numargs = 1;
> ia->args.in_args[0].size = sizeof(ia->in);
> diff --git a/fs/fuse/passthrough.c b/fs/fuse/passthrough.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..86ab4eafa7bf
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/fs/fuse/passthrough.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,55 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +
> +#include "fuse_i.h"
> +
> +int fuse_passthrough_setup(struct fuse_req *req, unsigned int fd)
> +{
> + int ret;
> + int fs_stack_depth;
> + struct file *passthrough_filp;
> + struct inode *passthrough_inode;
> + struct super_block *passthrough_sb;
> +
> + /* Passthrough mode can only be enabled at file open/create time */
> + if (req->in.h.opcode != FUSE_OPEN && req->in.h.opcode != FUSE_CREATE) {
> + pr_err("FUSE: invalid OPCODE for request.\n");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + passthrough_filp = fget(fd);
> + if (!passthrough_filp) {
> + pr_err("FUSE: invalid file descriptor for passthrough.\n");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + if (!passthrough_filp->f_op->read_iter ||
> + !passthrough_filp->f_op->write_iter) {
> + pr_err("FUSE: passthrough file misses file operations.\n");
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + passthrough_inode = file_inode(passthrough_filp);
> + passthrough_sb = passthrough_inode->i_sb;
> + fs_stack_depth = passthrough_sb->s_stack_depth + 1;

... for example:

if (fs_stack_depth && passthrough_sb->s_type == fuse_fs_type) {
pr_err("FUSE: stacked passthrough file\n");
goto out;
}

But maybe we want to ban passthrough to any lower FUSE at least for start.

> + ret = -EEXIST;

Why EEXIST? Why not EINVAL?

> + if (fs_stack_depth > FILESYSTEM_MAX_STACK_DEPTH) {
> + pr_err("FUSE: maximum fs stacking depth exceeded for passthrough\n");
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + req->args->passthrough_filp = passthrough_filp;
> + return 0;
> +out:
> + fput(passthrough_filp);
> + return ret;
> +}
> +

And speaking of overlayfs, I believe you may be able to test your code with
fuse-overlayfs (passthrough to upper files).

This is a project with real users running real workloads who may be
able to provide you with valuable feedback from testing.

Thanks,
Amir.

[1] https://github.com/containers/fuse-overlayfs

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-09-12 13:06    [W:0.147 / U:6.056 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site