Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 17 May 2022 11:22:03 +0200 | From | Christian Brauner <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] erofs: support idmapped mounts |
| |
On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 05:15:02PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote: > Hi Christian, > > On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 11:06:22AM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: > > On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 03:32:10PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote: > > > This patch enables idmapped mounts for erofs, since all dedicated helpers > > > for this functionality existsm, so, in this patch we just pass down the > > > user_namespace argument from the VFS methods to the relevant helpers. > > > > > > Simple idmap example on erofs image: > > > > > > 1. mkdir dir > > > 2. touch dir/file > > > 3. mkfs.erofs erofs.img dir > > > 4. mount -t erofs -o loop erofs.img /mnt/erofs/ > > > > > > 5. ls -ln /mnt/erofs/ > > > total 0 > > > -rw-rw-r-- 1 1000 1000 0 May 17 15:26 file > > > > > > 6. mount-idmapped --map-mount b:0:1001:1 /mnt/erofs/ /mnt/scratch_erofs/ > > > > > > 7. ls -ln /mnt/scratch_erofs/ > > > total 0 > > > -rw-rw-r-- 1 65534 65534 0 May 17 15:26 file > > > > Your current example maps id 0 in the filesystem to id 1001 in the > > mount. But since no files with id 0 exist in the filesystem you're > > illustrating that unmapped ids are correctly reported as overflow{g,u}id. > > > > I think what you'd rather want to show is something like this: > > > > 5. ls -ln /mnt/erofs/ > > total 0 > > -rw-rw-r-- 1 1000 1000 0 May 17 15:26 file > > > > 6. mount-idmapped --map-mount b:1000:1001:1 /mnt/erofs/ /mnt/scratch_erofs/ > > > > 7. ls -ln /mnt/scratch_erofs/ > > total 0 > > -rw-rw-r-- 1 1001 1001 0 May 17 15:26 file > > > > where id 1000 in the filesystem maps to id 1001 in the mount. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao.yu@oppo.com> > > > --- > > > > Overall this is currently the smallest patch to support idmapped mounts. > > > > Is erofs integrated with xfstests in any way? > > For read-only filesystems we probably only need to verify that {g,u}id > > are correctly reported. All the writable aspects are irrelevant. > > Currently most generic xfstests test cases are unsuitable for erofs. > > Instead we have regression testcases for EROFS specific since it needs > to generate images with care, > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/xiang/erofs-utils.git/log/?h=experimental-tests > > Also we have an erofsstress to do long time random stress workloads, > https://github.com/erofs/erofsstress > > But yeah, it's some awkward that fstests idmapped mount testcases may > be unsuitable for EROFS for now. I will add some new testcases to build > images and test for this behavior. > > > > > Looks good, > > Reviewed-by: Christian Brauner (Microsoft) <brauner@kernel.org> > > Thanks for your review!
Thanks for supporting this in erofs! Christian
| |