[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201505151635.47489.luke@dashjr.org>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 16:35:45 +0000
From: Luke Dashjr <luke@...hjr.org>
To: dsterba@...e.cz
Cc: Chris Mason <clm@...com>, Josef Bacik <jbacik@...com>,
linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] btrfs: bugfix: handle FS_IOC32_{GETFLAGS,SETFLAGS,GETVERSION} in btrfs_ioctl
On Friday, May 15, 2015 11:19:22 AM David Sterba wrote:
> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 04:27:54PM +0000, Luke Dashjr wrote:
> > On Thursday, May 14, 2015 2:06:17 PM David Sterba wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 05:15:26PM +0000, Luke Dashjr wrote:
> > > > 32-bit ioctl uses these rather than the regular FS_IOC_* versions.
> > > > They can be handled in btrfs using the same code. Without this,
> > > > 32-bit {ch,ls}attr fail.
> > >
> > > Yes, but this has to be implemented in another way. See eg.
> > > https://git.kernel.org/linus/e9750824114ff
> >
> > I don't see what is different with that implementation. All
> > f2fs_compat_ioctl does is change cmd to the plain-IOC equivalent and
> > call f2fs_ioctl with the same arg (compat_ptr merely causes a cast to
> > void* and back, which AFAIK is a noop on 64-bit?). Am I missing
> > something?
>
> No, that's the idea. Add new calback for compat_ioctl, put it under
> #ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT and do the same number switch.
The idea is to wrap it in a way that doesn't actually change any of the logic?
I'm not sure I understand still :(
> > I could try to just imitate it, but
> > I'd rather know what is significant/going on to ensure I don't waste your
> > time with code I don't even properly understand myself.
> >
> > Perhaps by coincidence, the patch does at least in practice work
> > (although at least `btrfs send` appears to be broken still, and I'm at a
> > loss for how to approach fixing that).
>
> The 'receive' 32bit/64bit was broken due to size difference in the ioctl
> structure that led to different ioctl. This is transparently fixed, see
> BTRFS_IOC_SET_RECEIVED_SUBVOL_32 at the top of ioctl.c.
>
> In what way is SEND broken? There are only u64/s64 members in
> btrfs_ioctl_send_args, I don't see how this could break on 32/64
> userspace/kernel.
# btrfs send -p home/initial/ home/20150514_1431573370/
At subvol home/20150514_1431573370/
ERROR: send ioctl failed with -25: Inappropriate ioctl for device
But I am stuck on 3.14.41 due to Linux being unstable in newer versions[1], so
maybe this is unrelated to 32-bit and already fixed in 4.0?
Luke
1. https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=87891
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists