On 2026/1/7 15:32, Hongbo Li wrote:
On 2026/1/7 15:27, Gao Xiang wrote:
On 2026/1/7 15:17, Hongbo Li wrote:
Hi, Xiang
...
+
+bool erofs_ishare_fill_inode(struct inode *inode)
+{
+ struct erofs_sb_info *sbi = EROFS_SB(inode->i_sb);
+ struct erofs_inode *vi = EROFS_I(inode);
+ struct erofs_inode_fingerprint fp;
+ struct inode *sharedinode;
+ unsigned long hash;
+
+ if (!test_opt(&sbi->opt, INODE_SHARE))
+ return false;
+ (void)erofs_xattr_fill_ishare_fp(&fp, inode, sbi->domain_id);
+ if (!fp.size)
+ return false;
Why not just:
if (erofs_xattr_fill_ishare_fp(&fp, inode, sbi->domain_id))
return false;
When erofs_sb_has_ishare_xattrs returns false, erofs_xattr_fill_ishare_fp also
considers success.
Then why !test_opt(&sbi->opt, INODE_SHARE) didn't return?
The MOUNT_INODE_SHARE flag is passed from user's mount option. And it is
controllered by CONFIG_EROFS_FS_PAGE_CACHE_SHARE. I doesn't do the check when
the superblock without ishare_xattrs. (It seems the mount options is static,
although it is useless for mounting with inode_share on one EROFS image without
ishare_xattrs).
So should we check that if the superblock has not ishare_xattrs feature, and we
return -ENOSUPP?
I think you should just mask off the INODE_SHARE if the on-disk
compat feature is unavailable, and print a warning just like
FSDAX fallback.
Ok, it seems reasonable, and also can remove the check logic in
erofs_xattr_fill_ishare_fp. I will change in next version.
I think you should move
if (!test_opt(&sbi->opt, INODE_SHARE))
return -EOPNOTSUPP;
into erofs_xattr_fill_inode_fingerprint() directly.
Thanks,
Gao Xiang
