Message ID | 20240929185053.10554-1-pali@kernel.org (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | cifs: Improve support for native SMB symlinks | expand |
Merged patches 2, 3, 4 and 6 from this series into cifs-2.6.git for-next For patch 1, seems like rename could get in the way of backports, and is only a minor improvement (could consider it in the future for 6.13-rc if part of other cleanup/improvements, but lower priority) For patch 5 it could be ok - but wanted more opinions on that ... since wouldn't want it to break POSIX - e.g. what would happen with this patch if a Linux server changed the target of a symlink from a file to directory (or the other way around) - is there any risk of breaking POSIX symlink semantics in a pure Linux->Linux case with this patch? For patch 7, it is relatively larger fix (and less important for pure Linux workloads) so wanted some additional opinions/feedback on this from others On Sun, Sep 29, 2024 at 1:51 PM Pali Rohár <pali@kernel.org> wrote: > > This patch series improves interoperability of native SMB symlinks > (stored in IO_REPARSE_TAG_SYMLINK reparse point) between Linux SMB > client and Windows SMB server storage (NTFS). > > Fixed test cases by this patch series are: > > Fixes parsing of symlinks relative to the top of the export which can be > created on Windows by: > > mklink symlink \relative\path\from\export > > > Fixes parsing of symlinks in absolute form which can be created on > Windows by: > > mklink symlink C:\absolute\path > > > Fixes creating of symlinks pointing to directory. So Linux commands: > > mkdir dir > ln -s dir symlink1 > ln -s another_dir/ symlink2 > > creates a symlink which would be now understood also by Windows as > symlinks to directories. > > > Fixes creating of symlinks pointing to current or parent directory. > So following commands create valid symlink understood by Windows: > > ln -s . symlink_cur > ln -s .. symlink_parent > > > Fixes creating of absolute symlinks. Absolute symlinks on Windows are > quite complicated due to nature of DOS/Win32 path form used by Windows > applications and NT path form in which are symlink paths stored. Also > complication is that NT object paths have different hierarchy than POSIX > paths generally. Required information about NT object hierarchy used in > native absolute symlinks are in comments in the last patch from this > series. > > To resolve mentioned problems I chosse way which is used by WSL, its > -t drvfs has mount option -o symlinkroot= which specify Linux path there > should point absolute windows drive letter symlinks. This could make > -t cifs mounts in WSL2 more compatible with symlinks coming from local > NTFS disks mounted by -t drvfs. > > I'm not sure how good are these changes, but I think that they improve > compatibility of symlinks between Linux and Windows systems. Maybe there > is some better solution how to handle some of those issues? > > > Pali Rohár (7): > cifs: Rename smb2_get_reparse_inode to smb2_create_reparse_inode > cifs: Improve creating native symlinks pointing to directory > cifs: Fix creating native symlinks pointing to current or parent > directory > cifs: Fix parsing native symlinks relative to the export > cifs: Fix parsing native symlinks directory/file type > cifs: Validate content of native symlink > cifs: Fix creating and resolving absolute NT-style symlinks > > fs/smb/client/cifs_unicode.c | 17 +- > fs/smb/client/cifsglob.h | 1 + > fs/smb/client/cifsproto.h | 1 + > fs/smb/client/fs_context.c | 22 ++ > fs/smb/client/fs_context.h | 2 + > fs/smb/client/inode.c | 1 + > fs/smb/client/reparse.c | 513 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > fs/smb/client/reparse.h | 4 +- > fs/smb/client/smb1ops.c | 3 +- > fs/smb/client/smb2file.c | 67 ++++- > fs/smb/client/smb2inode.c | 15 +- > fs/smb/client/smb2proto.h | 13 +- > 12 files changed, 602 insertions(+), 57 deletions(-) > > -- > 2.20.1 > >
On Sunday 29 September 2024 17:03:31 Steve French wrote: > For patch 5 it could be ok - but wanted more opinions on that ... > since wouldn't want it to break POSIX - e.g. what would happen with > this patch if a Linux server changed the target of a symlink from a > file to directory (or the other way around) - is there any risk of > breaking POSIX symlink semantics in a pure Linux->Linux case with this > patch? I reworked the "cifs: Fix parsing native symlinks directory/file type" patch to not change anything when server announce POSIX extension. So V2 version of that patch would be active only for non-POSIX SMB servers, like Windows SMB. I hope that this would address all possible problems (not sure if there are any) with Linux client <-> POSIX SMB server scenarios.