* Misono Tomohiro ([email protected]) wrote:
> > From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <[email protected]>
> >
> > Handle a
> > mount
> > hard reboot (without unmount)
> > mount
> >
> > we get another 'init' which FUSE doesn't normally expect.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dr. David Alan Gilbert <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c | 16 +++++++++++++++-
> > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c
> > b/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c
> > index 2d1d1a2e59..45125ef66a 100644
> > --- a/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c
> > +++ b/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_lowlevel.c
> > @@ -2436,7 +2436,21 @@ void fuse_session_process_buf_int(struct
> > fuse_session *se,
> > goto reply_err;
> > }
> > } else if (in->opcode == FUSE_INIT || in->opcode == CUSE_INIT) {
> > - goto reply_err;
> > + if (fuse_lowlevel_is_virtio(se)) {
>
> > + /*
> > + * TODO: This is after a hard reboot typically, we need to do
> > + * a destroy, but we can't reply to this request yet so
> > + * we can't use do_destroy
> > + */
>
> Hi,
>
> I wonder what is the TODO actually. Is this just to provide a common
> function for both here and do_destroy() or more than that?
Yes, we really need to combine it somehow; but do_destroy is based
n responding to a request, but we don't have a normal request at this
point.
Dave
> Thanks
> Misono
>
> > + fuse_log(FUSE_LOG_DEBUG, "%s: reinit\n", __func__);
> > + se->got_destroy = 1;
> > + se->got_init = 0;
> > + if (se->op.destroy) {
> > + se->op.destroy(se->userdata);
> > + }
> > + } else {
> > + goto reply_err;
> > + }
> > }
> >
> > err = EACCES;
> > --
> > 2.23.0
>
--
Dr. David Alan Gilbert / [email protected] / Manchester, UK
