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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0FA6C2BA83 for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 03:56:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.sourceforge.net (lists.sourceforge.net [216.105.38.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C1B81206D7 for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 03:56:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sourceforge.net header.i=@sourceforge.net header.b="cH5Fln5Z"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sf.net header.i=@sf.net header.b="c4QELiO2"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="QDjwA1UU" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org C1B81206D7 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=sfs-ml-1.v29.lw.sourceforge.com) by sfs-ml-1.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1j1j8A-0007RO-TS; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 03:56:06 +0000 Received: from [172.30.20.202] (helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1j1j89-0007R8-41 for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 03:56:05 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceforge.net; s=x; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=pNWa8x3voWLEepFqOrgfjz4N8M6OqVps8r27OXNAaPM=; b=cH5Fln5ZiJVSbiZNvz1rZo9r60 i2+CPUic+JJAL4Abks9v0FugGPAxD4LUk+AvnBqfhbFdFwA9i+Ezk/WvhdcJQXXyCHgTmlQroeibx EyudsTC92tbbOVbuZkqyYA7vf6KAP7CcISd5NglccqXff4Ny4wuMayYijvrAYz2nT1iA=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sf.net; s=x ; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To :From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=pNWa8x3voWLEepFqOrgfjz4N8M6OqVps8r27OXNAaPM=; b=c4QELiO2UukFLPLVYLKBKSyhbI 8jtVL5W5vYqWjEZtaov4iZm8fkBKRjcEXkTmGLiZfy+JGmwsItv2uKvJ4sVgsmc3mVLM5rDEBTEat DshcPDGX5/SJQm18x8cpxUaaN3nTfzCfoefM7olfkPj4T4I4ozAhlEtoiph2jUyEh46A=; Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by sfi-mx-4.v28.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92.2) id 1j1j86-0011lD-Rf for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 03:56:05 +0000 Received: from sol.localdomain (c-107-3-166-239.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [107.3.166.239]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5566B206D7; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 03:55:45 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1581479745; bh=QRHIt8kBfhFwG/eebDuW7D9CmPyDjyjrXyg9CDC5NUw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=QDjwA1UUCb18CDvTZAWN3AWxXhe8SylkHRngDpUO6Eo0l9UqmK2TbcwHSvmdzSIdq 8lpBsW3LIAzLnS9/lpjvbuepoMDAj1jRGvX2twIB172UT2z1b0FdwMXW2zw4q/ykCV QH0qbBpDSO+kDk6Nfy2KrHxMmTeVcqviduLNqrp8= Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 19:55:43 -0800 From: Eric Biggers To: Daniel Rosenberg Message-ID: <20200212035543.GD870@sol.localdomain> References: <20200208013552.241832-1-drosen@google.com> <20200208013552.241832-3-drosen@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200208013552.241832-3-drosen@google.com> X-Headers-End: 1j1j86-0011lD-Rf Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH v7 2/8] fs: Add standard casefolding support X-BeenThere: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: kernel-team@android.com, Theodore Ts'o , Jonathan Corbet , Richard Weinberger , Andreas Dilger , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Alexander Viro , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Jaegeuk Kim , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On Fri, Feb 07, 2020 at 05:35:46PM -0800, Daniel Rosenberg wrote: > This adds general supporting functions for filesystems that use > utf8 casefolding. It provides standard dentry_operations and adds the > necessary structures in struct super_block to allow this standardization. > > Ext4 and F2fs are switch to these implementations. I think you mean that ext4 and f2fs *will be switched* to these implementations? It's later in the series, not in this patch. > +#ifdef CONFIG_UNICODE > +bool needs_casefold(const struct inode *dir) > +{ > + return IS_CASEFOLDED(dir) && dir->i_sb->s_encoding && > + (!IS_ENCRYPTED(dir) || fscrypt_has_encryption_key(dir)); > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(needs_casefold); Can you add kerneldoc comments to all the new functions that are exported to modules? > +struct hash_ctx { > + struct utf8_itr_context ctx; > + unsigned long hash; > +}; > + > +static int do_generic_ci_hash(struct utf8_itr_context *ctx, int byte, int pos) > +{ > + struct hash_ctx *hctx = container_of(ctx, struct hash_ctx, ctx); > + > + hctx->hash = partial_name_hash((unsigned char)byte, hctx->hash); > + return 0; > +} > + > +int generic_ci_d_hash(const struct dentry *dentry, struct qstr *str) > +{ > + const struct inode *inode = READ_ONCE(dentry->d_inode); > + struct super_block *sb = dentry->d_sb; > + const struct unicode_map *um = sb->s_encoding; > + int ret = 0; > + struct hash_ctx hctx; > + > + if (!inode || !needs_casefold(inode)) > + return 0; > + > + hctx.hash = init_name_hash(dentry); > + hctx.ctx.actor = do_generic_ci_hash; > + ret = utf8_casefold_iter(um, str, &hctx.ctx); > + if (ret < 0) > + goto err; > + str->hash = end_name_hash(hctx.hash); > + > + return 0; > +err: > + if (sb_has_enc_strict_mode(sb)) > + ret = -EINVAL; > + return ret; > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(generic_ci_d_hash); > +#endif This breaks the !strict_mode case by starting to fail lookups of names that aren't valid Unicode, instead of falling back to the standard case-sensitive behavior. There is an xfstest for casefolding; is this bug not caught by it (in which case the test needs to be improved)? Or did you just not run it? > diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h > index 6eae91c0668f9..a260afbc06d22 100644 > --- a/include/linux/fs.h > +++ b/include/linux/fs.h > @@ -1382,6 +1382,12 @@ extern int send_sigurg(struct fown_struct *fown); > #define SB_ACTIVE (1<<30) > #define SB_NOUSER (1<<31) > > +/* These flags relate to encoding and casefolding */ > +#define SB_ENC_STRICT_MODE_FL (1 << 0) It would be helpful if the comment mentioned that these flags are stored on-disk (and therefore can't be re-numbered, unlike the other flags defined nearby). > +#ifdef CONFIG_UNICODE > + struct unicode_map *s_encoding; > + __u16 s_encoding_flags; > #endif This isn't a UAPI header, so 's_encoding_flags' should use u16, not __u16. And for that matter, 's_encoding_flags' will be pointer-sized due to padding anyway, so maybe just make it 'unsigned int'? > +static inline bool needs_casefold(const struct inode *dir) > +{ > + return 0; > +} > +#endif Use false instead of 0 for 'bool'. - Eric _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel