On 04/17, Fengnan Chang wrote: > In this patch, we cannot handle files without extensions. At the moment there > is just a rough idea，test a portion of the data to decide whether to compress > it before performing a full compression. It may need more test. Any other > suggestions? > > In my consider, the non-compress flag has a higher priority than the > compressed flag. > 1. the same extension name cannot not appear in both compress and > non-compress extension at the same time， check this in mount process. > 2. If the compress extension specifies all files, the types specified by the > non-compress extension will be treated as special cases and will not be > compressed. > 3. If the non-compress extension specifies all files, should not specifies > any compress extension, check in mount process too.
Do we need to support * for non-compress? > > Any other suggestions? So, what could the priority for all the below combinations? E.g., comp_extention, no_comp_extention, dir_flag, comp_file_flag, no_comp_file_flag. Thanks, _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
