qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v3 02/10] virtiofsd: Add TempFd structure


From: Max Reitz
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 02/10] virtiofsd: Add TempFd structure
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2021 12:44:00 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0

On 06.08.21 16:41, Vivek Goyal wrote:
On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 05:01:26PM +0200, Max Reitz wrote:
We are planning to add file handles to lo_inode objects as an
alternative to lo_inode.fd.  That means that everywhere where we
currently reference lo_inode.fd, we will have to open a temporary file
descriptor that needs to be closed after use.

So instead of directly accessing lo_inode.fd, there will be a helper
function (lo_inode_fd()) that either returns lo_inode.fd, or opens a new
file descriptor with open_by_handle_at().  It encapsulates this result
in a TempFd structure to let the caller know whether the FD needs to be
closed after use (opened from the handle) or not (copied from
lo_inode.fd).
I am wondering why this notion of "owned". Why not have this requirement
of always closing "fd". If we copied it from lo_inode.fd, then we will
need to dup() it. Otherwise we opened it from file handle and we will
need to close it anyway.

I guess you are trying to avoid having to call dup() and that's why
this notion of "owned" fd.

Yes, I don’t want to dup() it.  One reason is that I’d rather just not.  It’s something that we can avoid, and dup-ing every time wouldn’t make the code that much simpler (I think, without having tried).

One other is because this affects the current behavior (with O_PATH FDs), which I don’t want to alter.

Well, and finally, as a pragmatic reason, virtiofsd-rs uses the same structure and I don’t really want C virtiofsd and virtiofsd-rs to differ too much.

By using g_auto(TempFd) to store this result, callers will not even have
to care about closing a temporary FD after use.  It will be done
automatically once the object goes out of scope.

Signed-off-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Connor Kuehl <ckuehl@redhat.com>
---
  tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
  1 file changed, 49 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c b/tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c
index 1f27eeabc5..fb5e073e6a 100644
--- a/tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c
+++ b/tools/virtiofsd/passthrough_ll.c
@@ -178,6 +178,28 @@ struct lo_data {
      int user_posix_acl, posix_acl;
  };
+/**
+ * Represents a file descriptor that may either be owned by this
+ * TempFd, or only referenced (i.e. the ownership belongs to some
+ * other object, and the value has just been copied into this TempFd).
+ *
+ * The purpose of this encapsulation is to be used as g_auto(TempFd)
+ * to automatically clean up owned file descriptors when this object
+ * goes out of scope.
+ *
+ * Use temp_fd_steal() to get an owned file descriptor that will not
+ * be closed when the TempFd goes out of scope.
+ */
+typedef struct {
+    int fd;
+    bool owned; /* fd owned by this object? */
+} TempFd;
+
+#define TEMP_FD_INIT ((TempFd) { .fd = -1, .owned = false })
+
+static void temp_fd_clear(TempFd *temp_fd);
+G_DEFINE_AUTO_CLEANUP_CLEAR_FUNC(TempFd, temp_fd_clear);
+
  static const struct fuse_opt lo_opts[] = {
      { "sandbox=namespace",
        offsetof(struct lo_data, sandbox),
@@ -255,6 +277,33 @@ static struct lo_data *lo_data(fuse_req_t req)
      return (struct lo_data *)fuse_req_userdata(req);
  }
+/**
+ * Clean-up function for TempFds
+ */
+static void temp_fd_clear(TempFd *temp_fd)
+{
+    if (temp_fd->owned) {
+        close(temp_fd->fd);
+        *temp_fd = TEMP_FD_INIT;
+    }
+}
+
+/**
+ * Return an owned fd from *temp_fd that will not be closed when
+ * *temp_fd goes out of scope.
+ *
+ * (TODO: Remove __attribute__ once this is used.)
+ */
+static __attribute__((unused)) int temp_fd_steal(TempFd *temp_fd)
+{
+    if (temp_fd->owned) {
+        temp_fd->owned = false;
+        return temp_fd->fd;
+    } else {
+        return dup(temp_fd->fd);
+    }
+}
This also will be simpler if we always called dup() and every caller
will close() fd.

I think only downside is having to call dup()/close(). Not sure if this
is an expensive operation or not.

Vivek





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]