On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 09:07:33PM -0400, Valdis Kletnieks wrote:
> Three questions: (a) ACK/NAK on this patch,
Acked-by: Darrick J. Wong
> (b) should it be all in one patch, or one to add to errno.h and 6
> patches for 6 filesystems?), and
I don't particularly care, but I've a slight
On 2019/10/31 0:09, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On 10/26, Chao Yu wrote:
>> On 2019/10/26 2:18, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>>> On 10/24, Chao Yu wrote:
Hi Jaegeuk,
On 2019/10/23 1:16, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> This patch supports 2MB-aligned pinned file, which can guarantee no GC at
> all
On 2019/10/31 1:02, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 04:43:52PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
>> static void bio_post_read_processing(struct bio_post_read_ctx *ctx)
>> {
>> -/*
>> - * We use different work queues for decryption and for verity
>> because
On 2019/10/31 0:50, Eric Biggers wrote:
> No, just use kvmalloc(). The whole point of kvmalloc() is that it tries
> kmalloc() and then falls back to vmalloc() if it fails.
Okay, it's fine to me, let me fix this in another patch.
Thanks,
>
> - Eric
> .
>
On 2019/10/30 23:14, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 06:43:45PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:
>>> You're right, in low memory scenario, allocation with bioset will be
>>> faster, as
>>> you mentioned offline, maybe we can add/use a priviate bioset like btrfs did
>>> rather than using
Three questions: (a) ACK/NAK on this patch, (b) should it be all in one
patch, or one to add to errno.h and 6 patches for 6 filesystems?), and
(c) if one patch, who gets to shepherd it through?
There's currently 6 filesystems that have the same #define. Move it
into errno.h so it's defined in
From: Eric Biggers
I had meant to replace these TODOs with the actual version when applying
the patches, but forgot to do so. Do it now.
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers
---
Documentation/filesystems/fsverity.rst | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 1:57 PM Eric Biggers wrote:
>
> FWIW, from reading the Chrome OS code, I think the code you linked to isn't
> where the breakage actually is. I think it's actually at
>
From: Douglas Anderson
This reverts commit 0642ea2409f3 ("ext4 crypto: fix to check feature
status before get policy").
The commit made a clear and documented ABI change that is not backward
compatible. There exists userspace code [1][2] that relied on the old
behavior and is now broken.
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 10:51:20AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 10:38 AM Eric Biggers wrote:
> >
> > Hi Douglas,
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 10:06:25AM -0700, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> > > This reverts commit 0642ea2409f3 ("ext4 crypto: fix to check feature
>
On 10/30, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 04:43:52PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> > On 2019/10/30 10:55, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 04:33:36PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> > >> On 2019/10/28 6:50, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > +bool f2fs_is_compressed_page(struct page
Hi Eric,
(add some mm folks...)
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 09:50:56AM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> It isn't really appropriate to create fake pagecache pages like this.
> > >>> Did you
> > >>> consider changing f2fs to use fscrypt_decrypt_block_inplace() instead?
> > >>
> > >> We
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 09:33:13AM -0700, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On 10/30, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 11:50:37PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:
> > >
> > > So I'm curious about the original issue in commit 740432f83560
> > > ("f2fs: handle failed bio allocation"). Since f2fs
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 04:43:52PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> static void bio_post_read_processing(struct bio_post_read_ctx *ctx)
> {
> -/*
> - * We use different work queues for decryption and for verity
> because
> - * verity may require
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 04:43:52PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2019/10/30 10:55, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 04:33:36PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> >> On 2019/10/28 6:50, Eric Biggers wrote:
> +bool f2fs_is_compressed_page(struct page *page)
> +{
> +if
Hi Robin,
Could you please address this build errors for mac build?
libf2fs_io.c:85:38: error: use of undeclared identifier 'false'
static bool dcache_exit_registered = false;
^
libf2fs_io.c:95:34: error: use of undeclared identifier 'false'
static bool
On 10/30, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 11:50:37PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:
> >
> > So I'm curious about the original issue in commit 740432f83560
> > ("f2fs: handle failed bio allocation"). Since f2fs manages multiple write
> > bios with its internal fio but it seems the
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 11:50:37PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:
>
> So I'm curious about the original issue in commit 740432f83560
> ("f2fs: handle failed bio allocation"). Since f2fs manages multiple write
> bios with its internal fio but it seems the commit is not helpful to
> resolve potential
On 10/26, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2019/10/26 2:18, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > On 10/24, Chao Yu wrote:
> >> Hi Jaegeuk,
> >>
> >> On 2019/10/23 1:16, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> >>> This patch supports 2MB-aligned pinned file, which can guarantee no GC at
> >>> all
> >>> by allocating fully valid 2MB segment.
>
Hi Ted,
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 11:14:45AM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 06:43:45PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:
> > > You're right, in low memory scenario, allocation with bioset will be
> > > faster, as
> > > you mentioned offline, maybe we can add/use a priviate bioset
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 06:43:45PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:
> > You're right, in low memory scenario, allocation with bioset will be
> > faster, as
> > you mentioned offline, maybe we can add/use a priviate bioset like btrfs did
> > rather than using global one, however, we'd better check how
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 05:27:54PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> Hi Xiang,
>
> On 2019/10/30 17:15, Gao Xiang wrote:
> > Hi Chao,
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 04:56:17PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> >> On 2019/10/30 11:55, Gao Xiang wrote:
> >>> remove such useless code and related fault injection.
> >>
Hi Xiang,
On 2019/10/30 17:15, Gao Xiang wrote:
> Hi Chao,
>
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 04:56:17PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
>> On 2019/10/30 11:55, Gao Xiang wrote:
>>> remove such useless code and related fault injection.
>>
>> Hi Xiang,
>>
>> Although, there is so many 'nofail' allocation in f2fs,
Hi Chao,
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 04:56:17PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2019/10/30 11:55, Gao Xiang wrote:
> > remove such useless code and related fault injection.
>
> Hi Xiang,
>
> Although, there is so many 'nofail' allocation in f2fs, I think we'd better
> avoid such allocation as much as
On 2019/10/30 11:55, Gao Xiang wrote:
> remove such useless code and related fault injection.
Hi Xiang,
Although, there is so many 'nofail' allocation in f2fs, I think we'd better
avoid such allocation as much as possible (now for read path, we may allow to
fail to allocate bio), I suggest to
On 2019/10/30 10:55, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 04:33:36PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
>> On 2019/10/28 6:50, Eric Biggers wrote:
+bool f2fs_is_compressed_page(struct page *page)
+{
+ if (!page_private(page))
+ return false;
+ if
26 matches
Mail list logo
