From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.223.130]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7FAC01DFCE for ; Thu, 18 Jan 2024 00:02:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.135.223.130 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1705536131; cv=none; b=PLSwPMxZvx8C0cHMTiH8kMFJqk5GaLk8GZhIpzzWAHdQlDsNaRdRCh5oj0xkw30tFRUBrY9141WXfC26TBJYiTQKaXluXk29/WOSz0lPbhqeH+5D3r8FBpRgnjeqm7hvu6MphwaPBHS/Hpl2/FHPEUfapCPvR09bF7GgdN8QyOM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1705536131; c=relaxed/simple; bh=pxnjld9I7dYZcehpV4j4ggbqIXqPB7V6Bw1gcoezzUc=; h=Received:DKIM-Signature:DKIM-Signature:DKIM-Signature: DKIM-Signature:Received:Received:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To: Organization:References:Date:Message-ID:User-Agent:MIME-Version: Content-Type:X-Spamd-Result:X-Spam-Level:X-Spam-Flag:X-Spam-Score; b=QAvlU8PBy6TmgY4+7ezeWPv6FTroQruJkCEgBgxbV1DvjYduIS6SRoiNwRFnP9SjGC7hGONqxFAE3OgtpOV+7WZoGwJvhFpSGzmRNMB2ZIxLhY7jwIKK+vnGh+PumfzK6pX5EQUw2pJqYGfDYsZmyXZ7/8JKCRG1/aP+3I6Q8z0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.de; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b=JWnVo48a; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b=rdOVDzlI; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b=JWnVo48a; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b=rdOVDzlI; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.135.223.130 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b="JWnVo48a"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b="rdOVDzlI"; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b="JWnVo48a"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.b="rdOVDzlI" Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org [10.150.64.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 832A422294; Thu, 18 Jan 2024 00:02:07 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1705536127; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=1tuwcynDzHfhYKMb3PNbEa1UmMAhpbej5Exat8VYPNo=; b=JWnVo48aetnJrcymfZHUfAOaXeezjqx9eH4kvMSw9xFPm/0z9ePi58ioF5jW/xRBHyVToQ CkK0N6GYKlAxecWu/ZLxKkU14LH7iwa/7SGRZgqCb/UpD/jtLuzjDA6Hf4PZMH9agNepbB oFNeFbskwi/of+31xt8DJz/NEyrEX5k= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1705536127; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=1tuwcynDzHfhYKMb3PNbEa1UmMAhpbej5Exat8VYPNo=; b=rdOVDzlIqyjNzOWc+1qI+VdAyqQ2LOz9G3rnJC3xtJwD/rNKKiUSwsOLPHQfxjy1szl1Mm EZkJeHprAXHsJXAw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1705536127; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=1tuwcynDzHfhYKMb3PNbEa1UmMAhpbej5Exat8VYPNo=; b=JWnVo48aetnJrcymfZHUfAOaXeezjqx9eH4kvMSw9xFPm/0z9ePi58ioF5jW/xRBHyVToQ CkK0N6GYKlAxecWu/ZLxKkU14LH7iwa/7SGRZgqCb/UpD/jtLuzjDA6Hf4PZMH9agNepbB oFNeFbskwi/of+31xt8DJz/NEyrEX5k= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1705536127; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=1tuwcynDzHfhYKMb3PNbEa1UmMAhpbej5Exat8VYPNo=; b=rdOVDzlIqyjNzOWc+1qI+VdAyqQ2LOz9G3rnJC3xtJwD/rNKKiUSwsOLPHQfxjy1szl1Mm EZkJeHprAXHsJXAw== Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC3D9136F5; Thu, 18 Jan 2024 00:02:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id L1xuI35qqGWJLAAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Thu, 18 Jan 2024 00:02:06 +0000 From: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi To: Al Viro Cc: ebiggers@kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, jaegeuk@kernel.org, Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH] libfs: Attempt exact-match comparison first during casefold lookup In-Reply-To: <20240117223857.GN1674809@ZenIV> (Al Viro's message of "Wed, 17 Jan 2024 22:38:57 +0000") Organization: SUSE References: <20240117222836.11086-1-krisman@suse.de> <20240117223857.GN1674809@ZenIV> Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2024 21:02:03 -0300 Message-ID: <87edeffr0k.fsf@mailhost.krisman.be> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Authentication-Results: smtp-out1.suse.de; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-0.11 / 50.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCPT_COUNT_FIVE(0.00)[6]; HAS_ORG_HEADER(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.de:s=susede2_rsa,suse.de:s=susede2_ed25519]; FUZZY_BLOCKED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; BAYES_HAM(-0.01)[50.44%] X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.11 Al Viro writes: > On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 07:28:36PM -0300, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote: > >> Note that, for strict mode, generic_ci_d_compare used to reject an >> invalid UTF-8 string, which would now be considered valid if it >> exact-matches the disk-name. But, if that is the case, the filesystem >> is corrupt. More than that, it really doesn't matter in practice, >> because the name-under-lookup will have already been rejected by >> generic_ci_d_hash and we won't even get here. > >> - if (ret >= 0) >> - return ret; >> - >> - if (sb_has_strict_encoding(sb)) >> + qstr.len = len; >> + qstr.name = str; >> + ret = utf8_strncasecmp(dentry->d_sb->s_encoding, name, &qstr); >> + if (ret < 0) >> return -EINVAL; > > Umm... So why bother with -EINVAL? The rest looks sane, but > considering the fact that your string *has* passed ->d_hash(), > do we need anything beyond > return utf8_strncasecmp(dentry->d_sb->s_encoding, name, &qstr); > here? No, you are right. In fact, it seems d_compare can't propagate errors anyway as it is only compared against 0, anyway. I spin the v2 dropping this bit as suggested. thanks, -- Gabriel Krisman Bertazi