mds vs f_fstypename
mds vs f_fstypename
- Subject: mds vs f_fstypename
- From: Jorgen Lundman <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2019 12:41:49 +0900
- Autocrypt: addr=email@hidden; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mQGiBD2KhOgRBACHjaJI1Q5XudbpYACUeGAKFxsxhhg46svF6Y0HzzDP+ZMQENVGiqucma0H b/mY9knTJ5F+rQZO+LKG2T4oBH1VdznJkz28tkmZUXGCEmNOZ852Hb1fFRwnbngRylMq7cEV TgupfCWYbC6Qw7eKBlHWjlvFosn/r828j7STe0CtawCgsbMU6598cmwIvOXaSGuDHLnMzfED /0SVpaTDADGymmjZ/RUyl7wc0D/1Dd0N17kZzQuwXQtj0CWnGwC8XWEvYLdAwNoGmzkJgVg4 3l5JPo4Yeuj7hNayRCjQU6jvnSdj0AuItfuE76/YdSG/X+TWAdHsizXtdXxf6KrS5PSjWult b4yL2EoYkiN58SflRa287mwJxatpA/9/axDaElD8Ko4QsskT2FamKLms1clT8IcuN1JNP71h b4gG0sng8jIl534r3KucJjlYEIp6lL3jBD/lcNQqd+UXMsR7KKEuDvW/ZMzQdLMvpyRCN463 jzrclxG1rXuvyeSWKiOnQbcD5pwsff3xlbb3mMovkf6rbXxvZxQlfUAuRLQkSm9yZ2VuIEx1 bmRtYW4gPGx1bmRtYW5AbHVuZG1hbi5uZXQ+iFkEExECABkFAj2KhOgECwcDAgMVAgMDFgIB Ah4BAheAAAoJEPNmEmurHstLXGgAnA7x3Ipz89W9tWjeJZ3AeEF6DAX/AJ4+QReCt51Nnovp 3T17+gy+p91MEbkBDQQ9ioTpEAQA5omoMw1PE/2reQ96uhFr/eFtGEc6136juCE6Lbrrc52j /DwsB0s87miNKfBRUGKXaqLQmfPY9Qajz/MHUHQ9iOkpCGou8RNviJGKFup4qf/g1qzNQ9ud pgkTEc7qZ7qBWG5HcOoIAvM78qvKwV0Sedry6TpOaiWsuL1HWdSGXI8AAwcEALVHV3MQ+a5K vwhX8Pam52AnIEzcw3m7tcSoJikLZhR//spUaZ3++hN+NNlSxgnGJ+VWKyhxc+SA/IO32vFP rAS6HxyfdZtIKPXfwM/8HjTUa4n6DR8ChIrS43X6cz3TZCFVD9tYLLP5cKo6uuPBd807EQN+ GJAzER048LeRiWMNiEYEGBECAAYFAj2KhOoACgkQ82YSa6sey0soMgCgg7zP7pYVB12AgkyN 0aUsovPMPCQAnjaw8yZSKLeBOzplkeFSIIbfWqTs
- Dkim-filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 mail.lundman.net B1A4F9BB65
- Openpgp: preference=signencrypt
Hello list,
Back when we desperately tried to get ZFS to work with Spotlight, we found
that we had to change vfsstatfs->f_fstypename to return "hfs" instead of
"zfs". I just assumed mds did a simple string compare with "hfs" and that
was just how things were.
So recently we tried to lie and say we were "apfs" instead of "hfs", and
found that mds does not want to work in that case either.
That could suggest that ZFS is doing something wrong, as opposed to mds
ignoring ZFS. (So maybe it isn't doing a string compare after all).
Working with mds is a bit of a "black box", it either works or it doesn't.
There are no clues to get as to what could be wrong. (right? No debug
messages or similar?)
I have made the ZFS replies to statfs, getattrlist(ATTR_VOL_CAPABILITIES),
vnop_tables, identical to that of apfs, as well as dtruss'ing mds for
clues, but they still don't like each other.
I know there are no apfs, nor mds, sources. But is it possible to get clues
as to what mds does differently when running on "apfs" compared to "hfs"?
Are we accidentally hooking into a hfs compatibility mode in mds.
(We haven't implemented getattrlist, getattrlistbulk, but the XNU kernel
looks to handle that very nicely, and it /looks like/ that shouldn't be the
issue).
As for not working, it looks a bit like:
# zpool create -f -O com.apple.mimic_hfs=on tank disk0
# touch /Volumes/tank/test.txt
# mdls /world.txt
kMDItemContentCreationDate = 2014-04-17 03:02:53 +0000
[lots more information dumped here]
# zpool create -f -O com.apple.mimic_hfs=off tank disk0
# touch /Volumes/tank/test.txt
# mdls /world.txt
[empty]
Anything would be appreciated!
Lund
--
Jorgen Lundman | <email@hidden>
Unix Administrator | +81 (0)90-5578-8500
Shibuya-ku, Tokyo | Japan
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Filesystem-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden