From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1D8EC46467 for ; Wed, 4 Jan 2023 07:22:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4Nn1JF0Yq1z3c3L for ; Wed, 4 Jan 2023 18:22:05 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=one8Tbor; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com (client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::630; helo=mail-pl1-x630.google.com; envelope-from=zbestahu@gmail.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=one8Tbor; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail-pl1-x630.google.com (mail-pl1-x630.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::630]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Nn1J41hkgz2xCd for ; Wed, 4 Jan 2023 18:21:55 +1100 (AEDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x630.google.com with SMTP id p24so12564056plw.11 for ; Tue, 03 Jan 2023 23:21:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=iw3XIQUksqj4ssUgSZQEszCRLX4KEhd3YST2RU5OcP0=; b=one8Tborvjv6BnESJ7pJdh7XmYmShMVve8kJY2Meha8m+4AHB19r/O69AgW5InIj1k GNL5qgap5qC6wCad15RaOlIt//Wmk0QwBf1/lD/6pssPhzECrecH/GsysK6Dy0OhYrmP Zc9IyDu/ygzP7B563Yn/4+7YBoz2e6GAjfFKa47e2IdwLVRo52yLDQ7Y77ErueP/pA0n QZzUiKkeq+CPGpeIU1bI8o1LczafX4JW+W2snHfg19H14bM6WqHkBDp9p8sVspO+2NR0 nk262i5htC433b1d/vovcWle3lVYreQRvCwAh2I2wZeFiflzaKGQkctuF3qMqclELE2s /AKw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=iw3XIQUksqj4ssUgSZQEszCRLX4KEhd3YST2RU5OcP0=; b=rAZViygfmpGzgtUKUnXRHRgs2W2Zpswcc+JQTDhelXQoRCb/UTPM5jwK+df8B2kTXd npwhxve4xyGuLPj/1QhqidbbLUK1hJymzYSsdF3wg/kc96XjpT+2JyHdVVUt1/t60fxT hki8SSCMz5D9o838H2Cpu+WilPTgLMiNzoS29Xdp5Yg73YR1p0LZVdUSzKzb19YPTr3V b/bMZ0IF3Iu9OIYdLEBqPbocCjtVpMmECR/hMzoZeQWlece9vakuhGYM+CwlwTc6ZA1S Z7WTCVDkIZ/x3G135ON9eau09ZTBRpnQI6Qh7+r9Ff4Bvk93S77dcxIgKjdXA3v9Omq9 J1yg== X-Gm-Message-State: AFqh2kr3CP42xDWNsjn7+3fcuZZrcrsM/MXDnIVP3kvQs1XwNO9MCZ2h LHVYtNSzm7Zf0uu8A+u+yNZRihtHffo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMrXdXtP/nYsvf/6rufksPVTfBXM8n8wmOqVwnkoIJ2asVukojZKgPDDdWqFodou9AdqTwrQXa4NKA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:7c95:b0:192:a04b:76be with SMTP id y21-20020a1709027c9500b00192a04b76bemr24520498pll.25.1672816912291; Tue, 03 Jan 2023 23:21:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([156.236.96.165]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ij6-20020a170902ab4600b00176e6f553efsm23298023plb.84.2023.01.03.23.21.51 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Tue, 03 Jan 2023 23:21:52 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2023 15:26:51 +0800 From: Yue Hu To: Xiang Gao Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] erofs-utils: fsck: support fragments Message-ID: <20230104152651.000051df.zbestahu@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5236b19c-763f-9a5b-a0c1-4c59fa7c6d05@linux.alibaba.com> References: <20221224094319.10317-1-zbestahu@gmail.com> <20230104112445.000075d8.zbestahu@gmail.com> <5236b19c-763f-9a5b-a0c1-4c59fa7c6d05@linux.alibaba.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.3 (GTK+ 2.24.32; i686-w64-mingw32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=GB18030 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Linux EROFS file system List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Yue Hu , linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org, zhangwen@coolpad.com Errors-To: linux-erofs-bounces+linux-erofs=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linux-erofs" On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 11:32:36 +0800 Xiang Gao wrote: > On 2023/1/4 11:24, Yue Hu wrote: > > Hi Xiang, > > > > On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 10:48:40 +0800 > > Xiang Gao wrote: > > > >> Hi Yue, > >> > >> ÔÚ 2022/12/24 17:43, Yue Hu дµÀ: > >>> From: Yue Hu > >>> > >>> Add compressed fragments support for fsck.erofs. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Yue Hu > >>> --- > >>> fsck/main.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > >>> lib/zmap.c | 1 + > >>> 2 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/fsck/main.c b/fsck/main.c > >>> index 2a9c501..9babc61 100644 > >>> --- a/fsck/main.c > >>> +++ b/fsck/main.c > >>> @@ -421,6 +421,31 @@ static int erofs_verify_inode_data(struct erofs_inode *inode, int outfd) > >>> if (!(map.m_flags & EROFS_MAP_MAPPED) || !fsckcfg.check_decomp) > >>> continue; > >>> > >>> + if (map.m_flags & EROFS_MAP_FRAGMENT) { > >>> + struct erofs_inode packed_inode = { > >>> + .nid = sbi.packed_nid, > >>> + }; > >> > >> Sorry for late response. > >> > >> a question... why don't we just rely on z_erofs_read_data()? > > > > We may fall back to uncompressed mode for packed inode due to 'ENOSPC'. > > I think we could just export parts of erofs_pread() to clean up the > whole erofs_verify_inode_data()... What's the clean up referring to? However, i think erofs_verify_inode_data() looks a little duplicate compared to erofs_read_raw_data/z_erofs_read_data(). > > Thanks, > Gao Xiang > >