From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@redhat.com>
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 00:44:19 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191217004419.GA6833@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191106101457.11237-3-lczerner@redhat.com>
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?
> + 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
barrier=0 OK, sets EXT4_MOUNT_BARRIER
barrier=42 error
barrier=yes OK, sets EXT4_MOUNT_BARRIER
barrier=no OK, sets EXT4_MOUNT_BARRIER
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?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-17 0:44 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 [this message]
2019-12-17 12:19 ` Lukas Czerner
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=20191217004419.GA6833@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=lczerner@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.