linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@redhat.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
	David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/17] ext4: Add fs parameter description
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 13:19:56 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191217121956.amsymslmuoy6kzu4@work> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191217004419.GA6833@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>

On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 12:44:19AM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 11:14:42AM +0100, Lukas Czerner wrote:
> > +	fsparam_string_empty
> > +			("usrjquota",		Opt_usrjquota),
> > +	fsparam_string_empty
> > +			("grpjquota",		Opt_grpjquota),
> 
> Umm...  That makes ...,usrjquota,... equivalent to ...,usrjquota=,...
> unless I'm misreading the series.  Different from mainline, right?

Unfortunatelly yes, I do not think this is a problem, but if you have a
solution within the new mount api framework I am happy to use it.

> 
> > +	fsparam_bool	("barrier",		Opt_barrier),
> > +	fsparam_flag	("nobarrier",		Opt_nobarrier),
> 
> That's even more interesting.  Current mainline:
> 		barrier		OK, sets EXT4_MOUNT_BARRIER
> 		barrier=0	OK, sets EXT4_MOUNT_BARRIER
> 		barrier=42	OK, sets EXT4_MOUNT_BARRIER
> 		barrier=yes	error
> 		barrier=no	error
> 		nobarrier	OK, clears EXT4_MOUNT_BARRIER
> Unless I'm misreading your series, you get
> 		barrier		error

Not really, this seems to be working as expected. Assuming that this
didn't change since 5.4.0-rc6. I does make sense to me that specifying
bool type parameter without any options would express "true".


> 		barrier=0	OK, sets EXT4_MOUNT_BARRIER


> 		barrier=42	error
> 		barrier=yes	OK, sets EXT4_MOUNT_BARRIER
> 		barrier=no	OK, sets EXT4_MOUNT_BARRIER

Those three are different, just because of how param_book() work. I do
not really see a problem with it, but if we want to keep it exactly the
same as current mainline it would be difficult with how the current api
works. Any suggestions ?

Thanks!
-Lukas

> 		nobarrier	OK, clears EXT4_MOUNT_BARRIER
> 
> Granted, mainline behaviour is... unintuitive, to put it mildly,
> but the replacement is just as strange _and_ incompatible with the
> existing one.
> 
> Am I missing something subtle there?
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2019-12-17 12:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-11-06 10:14 ext4: new mount API conversion Lukas Czerner
2019-11-06 10:14 ` [PATCH 01/17] vfs: Handle fs_param_neg_with_empty Lukas Czerner
2019-11-06 10:14 ` [PATCH 02/17] ext4: Add fs parameter description Lukas Czerner
2019-12-17  0:44   ` Al Viro
2019-12-17 12:19     ` Lukas Czerner [this message]
2019-12-17 15:20       ` Al Viro
2019-12-17 16:34         ` Lukas Czerner
2019-12-24 17:18           ` Al Viro
2019-11-06 10:14 ` [PATCH 03/17] ext4: move option validation to a separate function Lukas Czerner
2019-11-06 10:14 ` [PATCH 04/17] ext4: Change handle_mount_opt() to use fs_parameter Lukas Czerner
2019-11-06 10:14 ` [PATCH 05/17] ext4: Allow sb to be NULL in ext4_msg() Lukas Czerner
2019-11-06 10:14 ` [PATCH 06/17] ext4: move quota configuration out of handle_mount_opt() Lukas Czerner
2019-11-06 10:14 ` [PATCH 07/17] ext4: check ext2/3 compatibility outside handle_mount_opt() Lukas Czerner
2019-11-06 10:14 ` [PATCH 08/17] ext4: get rid of super block and sbi from handle_mount_ops() Lukas Czerner
2019-11-06 10:14 ` [PATCH 09/17] ext4: parse Opt_sb in handle_mount_opt() Lukas Czerner
2019-11-06 10:14 ` [PATCH 10/17] ext4: clean up return values " Lukas Czerner
2019-11-06 10:14 ` [PATCH 11/17] ext4: add ext4_get_tree for the new mount API Lukas Czerner
2019-11-06 10:14 ` [PATCH 12/17] ext4: refactor ext4_remount() Lukas Czerner
2019-11-06 10:14 ` [PATCH 13/17] ext4: add ext4_reconfigure for the new mount API Lukas Czerner
2019-11-06 10:14 ` [PATCH 14/17] ext4: add ext4_fc_free " Lukas Czerner
2019-11-06 10:14 ` [PATCH 15/17] ext4: switch to " Lukas Czerner
2019-11-06 10:14 ` [PATCH 16/17] ext4: change token2str() to use ext4_param_specs Lukas Czerner
2019-11-06 10:14 ` [PATCH 17/17] ext4: Remove unused code from old mount api Lukas Czerner

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20191217121956.amsymslmuoy6kzu4@work \
    --to=lczerner@redhat.com \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).