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 73BB7C001DF for ; Sun, 30 Jul 2023 13:19:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20201202 header.b=mzmS/wXf; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4RDMQm0nTCz2yDw for ; Sun, 30 Jul 2023 23:19:12 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20201202 header.b=mzmS/wXf; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org (client-ip=2604:1380:4641:c500::1; helo=dfw.source.kernel.org; envelope-from=chao@kernel.org; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4641:c500::1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4RDMQg3l7jz2xgp for ; Sun, 30 Jul 2023 23:19:07 +1000 (AEST) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AAD1460C1F; Sun, 30 Jul 2023 13:19:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D698EC433C7; Sun, 30 Jul 2023 13:19:03 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1690723145; bh=ReFQLttxiY4n0bfqQsyLuaghrwvNw1jeGn6XDUjPWaY=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=mzmS/wXfHhm2Eg3rfdDX0fHS5M6b17nR0Hj67PYsCqDdgje39ptXa/1SjsMFyrha/ ps6vHe5xHCX/0K176eT4S3ZIahRwpiErYbubTOw5xFk4JxIU4GnVbcTb8n9XclpvRv +aFUM7Q7W97cm/C1bj6cuPk2hbIQrUNUBeq+yl1SG7Pu1qOJ++u8qbnyP5iedkRLI1 Ivgd/pMnZR3JFRd75kvUUGH2EUaqDcuKUJhBvIhzjNHMeeOEKPTh6bzhbJdz7KehK6 5Sulp3RaDUq7jxJJk9AouvM0nO6Fs8gINQwqZuXCyFdwtlecHunRQwQF5Q07+jvI6l C/Pt6at/Co92Q== Message-ID: Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2023 21:19:02 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.13.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] erofs: boost negative xattr lookup with bloom filter Content-Language: en-US To: Jingbo Xu , hsiangkao@linux.alibaba.com, huyue2@coolpad.com, linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org References: <20230722094538.11754-1-jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com> <20230722094538.11754-3-jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com> From: Chao Yu In-Reply-To: <20230722094538.11754-3-jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: alexl@redhat.com Errors-To: linux-erofs-bounces+linux-erofs=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linux-erofs" On 2023/7/22 17:45, Jingbo Xu wrote: > Optimise the negative xattr lookup with bloom filter. > > The bit value for the bloom filter map has a reverse semantics for > compatibility. That is, the bit value of 0 indicates existence, while > the bit value of 1 indicates the absence of corresponding xattr. > > The initial version is _only_ enabled when xattr_filter_reserved is > zero. The filter map internals may change in the future, in which case > the reserved flag will be set non-zero and we don't need bothering the > compatible bits again at that time. For now disable the optimization if > this reserved flag is non-zero. > > Signed-off-by: Jingbo Xu Reviewed-by: Chao Yu Thanks