On 7/30/25 5:21 PM, asmadeus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > Hi Eric, > > Eric Sandeen wrote on Wed, Jul 30, 2025 at 02:18:51PM -0500: >> This is an updated attempt to convert 9p to the new mount API. 9p is >> one of the last conversions needed, possibly because it is one of the >> trickier ones! > > Thanks for this work! > > I think the main contention point here is that we're moving some opaque > logic that was in each transport into the common code, so e.g. an out of > tree transport can no longer have its own options (not that I'm aware of > such a transport existing anyway, so we probably don't have to worry > about this) I had not thought about out of tree transports. And I was a little unsure about moving everything into fs/9p/* but I'm not sure I saw any other way to do it in the new framework. @dhowells? > OTOH this is also a blessing because 9p used to silently ignore unknown > options, and will now properly refuse them (although it'd still silently > ignore e.g. rdma options being set for a virtio mount -- I guess there's > little harm in that as long as typos are caught?) Well, that might be considered a regression. Such conversions have burned us before, so if you want, it might be possible to keep the old more permissive behavior ... I'd have to look, not sure. > So I think I'm fine with the approach. > >> I was able to test this to some degree, but I am not sure how to test >> all transports; there may well be bugs here. It would be great to get >> some feedback on whether this approach seems reasonable, and of course >> any further review or testing would be most welcome. > > I still want to de-dust my test setup with rdma over siw for lack of > supported hardware, so I'll try to give it a try, but don't necessarily > wait for me as I don't know when that'll be.. Cool, thanks. -Eric
