From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17A9251C322; Tue, 29 Sep 2026 14:40:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790692847; cv=none; b=tDgDOgOzl052H4vOcojNmp4ECUXHaXFPbjQdDnLGxNXhFVxOEgRMDfZXZ8ekGPH56X6+dAqgqgx4IQBpPnRzlxEFtI6QM1gWCMUwoe+Nsz0Wnz4i66jRogVyMSWs2a/kraKFKBRlPOOcOzM7KL72hOFZitjs5wwYoxWH6XOFQLw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790692847; c=relaxed/simple; bh=pdg8fO7+sYzEICSiHorL6u51qpr7bbziZPeIRJ8DnII=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=WE9hTnT9ysIXs+qrLcpQ+jmEeFSKPY/JogRffjDjLSB9fr1xvlTd2suaVxDUeV0zwiqH4jBr/0VoxHz0UCSXxmx0dQptPVxO/oymp05fJGgyYiATXk2oeXs8hg48mp3CXGg4RAYFYDpJGhB1CoeSy9Xrsceb8c1573AMRoPOAM8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=PxZmXfC8; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="PxZmXfC8" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 915A41F000FF; Tue, 29 Sep 2026 14:40:41 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1790692841; bh=a5cHwHJWG+PdvObG6mgULv2DV2MwXG2ifabqUSsYM9g=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=PxZmXfC8YqsppmyjCnfb95WGea1J5Ah6N6sQjZWQXl/5JzSDueg34gZDFv7g3ur2h 1CmLjdRUdmbpi0euwALi+zBhQSH9VAeLqHEPb4R0TawXcdwix0M9MAwKZmMeyUu7M3 aKD7+yipa6i9FzKrAmi5lZelkEcHC50IC6JorSHnGcsE2OOswpeNV3m9l8TrxmxtGK shWYRf06U05ReKL3CjR1G1goxX7VXGSZlbyaNjAXMK9/t9eCxPTR/VLbP4JAWiOmRd cQBCY789a33BoVd4deCWQglUV0mTgTQoHnjvahwb3xyjR/zEg8esHSJgWi6QDhoAYl sC1Gf/urvDITw== Received: by pali.im (Postfix) id 9882A5F9; Tue, 29 Sep 2026 16:40:43 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2026 16:40:43 +0200 From: Pali =?utf-8?B?Um9ow6Fy?= To: Amir Goldstein Cc: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Christian Brauner , Jan Kara , Theodore Ts'o , Hugh Dickins , Daniel Tang , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Miklos Szeredi , linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Chuck Lever Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] ovl: Expose the filesystem encoding through sysfs Message-ID: <20260929144043.5rg4zf7uth333qke@pali> References: <20260928213155.2612039-1-krisman@suse.de> <20260928213155.2612039-5-krisman@suse.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 On Tuesday 29 September 2026 16:15:04 Amir Goldstein wrote: > On Mon, Sep 28, 2026 at 11:32 PM Gabriel Krisman Bertazi > wrote: > > > > This patch reproduces the same interface from ext4/f2fs to have feature > > parity, so users don't need to rely on parsing dmesg or trying +F on a > > temporary directory just to check for support. Note there is no > > encoding_flags file, as none are supported by ovl. > > > > Gabriel, > > I am not ok with this API. > It is wrong in several ways. > It is not generic, we have already file_getattr() to get casefold status. > There was a suggestion by Pali [1] to get the supported xflags - statx style, > which can be a way to say if a fs could return FS_XFLAG_CASEFOLD. Yea, sorry for that. I have not finished it, I did not have time. But I would like to address this as this is something was was asked more times... > In Chuck's v2 [2] FILEATTR_CASEFOLD_TYPE was already suggested > as an extension to file_getattr(). I think we can still do that if we include > proper versioning in the casefold type. > > TBH, I don't think anyone requested this - you only mentioned > the need to know if tmpfs was mounted with casefold on and that > doesn't mean that etx4/ovl patches are justified, but ext4 can decide > for themselves. > > The point is that this sysfs is not going to be the standard for all the > fs that can return the FS_XFLAG_CASEFOLD, so I see no reason > to add this sysfs interface to ovl. > > Thanks, > Amir. > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20250216164029.20673-4-pali@kernel.org/ > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20251211152116.480799-2-cel@kernel.org/