Re: [f2fs-dev] BUG: effect of immutable attribute (chattr +i) is gone after remount

Hi Jaegeuk, On 2017/5/17 4:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On 05/16, Tom Yan wrote: >> Hi all. >> >> Just happen to notice that a file on my f2fs filesystem marked as immutable >> is actually "mutable". At first I thought it was because of file corruption >> or so, but after some test it a

Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 2/4] f2fs: don't bother checking for encryption key in ->mmap()

On 2017/5/23 8:39, Eric Biggers wrote: > From: Eric Biggers > > Since only an open file can be mmap'ed, and we only allow open()ing an > encrypted file when its key is available, there is no need to check for > the key again before permitting each mmap(). > > This f2fs copy of this code was also

Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 4/4] f2fs: don't bother checking for encryption key in ->write_iter()

On 2017/5/23 8:39, Eric Biggers wrote: > From: Eric Biggers > > Since only an open file can be written to, and we only allow open()ing > an encrypted file when its key is available, there is no need to check > for the key again before permitting each ->write_iter(). > > This code was also broken

Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 3/4] ubifs: don't bother checking for encryption key in ->mmap()

On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 2:39 AM, Eric Biggers wrote: > From: Eric Biggers > > Since only an open file can be mmap'ed, and we only allow open()ing an > encrypted file when its key is available, there is no need to check for > the key again before permitting each mmap(). > > Signed-off-by: Eric Big

Re: [f2fs-dev] BUG: effect of immutable attribute (chattr +i) is gone after remount

Hi Chao, On 05/23, Chao Yu wrote: > Hi Jaegeuk, > > On 2017/5/17 4:28, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > Hi Tom, > > > > On 05/16, Tom Yan wrote: > >> Hi all. > >> > >> Just happen to notice that a file on my f2fs filesystem marked as > >> immutable is actually "mutable". At first I thought it was because

Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH v2 0/5] f2fs: improve performance of NAT/SIT flushing during cp

Hi Pengyang, Could you please shed a light on some performance gains by this? Thanks, On 05/20, Hou Pengyang wrote: > This patches are to designed to optimize NAT/SIT flushing procedure: > > patch 1) -- patch 3): > > during flush_nat_entries, we do: > 1) gang_lookup a radix tree, find all the

[f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: Do not issue small discards in LFS mode

clear_prefree_segments() issues small discards after discarding full segments. These small discards may not be section aligned, so not zone aligned when using a zoned block device, or more generally, when mounted in LFS mode. So do not issue these small discards when mounted in LFS mode. Signed-of