On Wed, Jul 09, 2025 at 10:55:31AM -0700, Joanne Koong wrote: > On Wed, Jul 9, 2025 at 4:24 AM Bernd Schubert <bernd@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 7/9/25 04:02, leo.lilong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > From: Long Li <leo.lilong@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > When mounting a FUSE filesystem with io_uring option and using io_uring > > > for communication, this option was not shown in /proc/mounts or mount > > > command output. This made it difficult for users to verify whether > > > io_uring was being used for communication in their FUSE mounts. > > > > > > Add io_uring to the list of mount options displayed in fuse_show_options() > > > when the fuse-over-io_uring feature is enabled and being used. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Long Li <leo.lilong@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > fs/fuse/inode.c | 2 ++ > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/fuse/inode.c b/fs/fuse/inode.c > > > index ecb869e895ab..a6a8cd84fdde 100644 > > > --- a/fs/fuse/inode.c > > > +++ b/fs/fuse/inode.c > > > @@ -913,6 +913,8 @@ static int fuse_show_options(struct seq_file *m, struct dentry *root) > > > seq_puts(m, ",default_permissions"); > > > if (fc->allow_other) > > > seq_puts(m, ",allow_other"); > > > + if (fc->io_uring) > > > + seq_puts(m, ",io_uring"); > > > if (fc->max_read != ~0) > > > seq_printf(m, ",max_read=%u", fc->max_read); > > > if (sb->s_bdev && sb->s_blocksize != FUSE_DEFAULT_BLKSIZE) > > > > I agree with you that is impossible to see, but issue is that io_uring > > is not a mount option. Maybe we should add a sysfs file? > > > > Libfuse knows so what about just relaying that information from libfuse? Yeah, if it's not a mount option we shouldn't actually display it in mountinfo...
