Hi Guifu, On Sat, Dec 05, 2020 at 05:22:13PM +0800, Li GuiFu via Linux-erofs wrote: > > > On 2020/12/5 17:16, Gao Xiang wrote: > > From: Gao Xiang <[email protected]> > > > > Previously, nlink of directories was treated as 1 for simplicity. > > > > Since st_nlink for dirs is actually not well defined, nlink=1 seems > > to pacify `find' (even without -noleaf option) and other utilities. > > AFAICT, isofs, romfs and cramfs always set it to 1, Overlayfs sets > > it to 1 conditionally, btrfs[1], ceph[2] and FUSE client historically > > set it to 1. > > > > The convention under unix is that it's # of subdirs including "." > > and "..". This patch tries to follow such convention if possible to > > optimize `find' performance since it's not quite hard for local fs. > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20100124003336.GP23006@think > > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] > > Signed-off-by: Gao Xiang <[email protected]> > > --- > > v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] > > changes since v1: > > - update a DBG_BUGON statement suggestted by Guifu. > > > > lib/inode.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > > 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > It looks good > Reviewed-by: Li Guifu <[email protected]>
Thanks for the review. I've applied all pending patches from experimental to dev branch. Tonight, I'll update README for erofsfuse (if you have time, kindly review it then, but I think I'm not going to wait for a long time) and will release erofs-utils v1.2 this weekend since we already have many commits and the release period has been somewhat longer than v1.0 ~ v1.1. Thanks, Gao Xiang > Thanks, >
