From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E19ECC433E6 for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 06:07:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.sourceforge.net (lists.sourceforge.net [216.105.38.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B02A320707 for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 06:07:04 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sourceforge.net header.i=@sourceforge.net header.b="JnR736Ej"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sf.net header.i=@sf.net header.b="KLRu8Ob7" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B02A320707 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=sfs-ml-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com) by sfs-ml-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kCcy5-0006DE-6X; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 06:07:01 +0000 Received: from [172.30.20.202] (helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kCcy3-0006D5-R5 for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 06:06:59 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceforge.net; s=x; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:CC:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=f8gICr5+ZNSDDhJMH/VG4+pq3wQaTEDFkrbK4hvvkzY=; b=JnR736Ejy3LpEd6qYs4eVEyg4s r5u7fdBdHRPAT+IKGqWo+BEKSfQH4F+D1NXY1jIJ4BLoU7Ch+twlbK0WU03+wcxJayqx9BOzoak8R tJNYRbqk4eKLQf9XXtnCJCmyM5w2lMwOkt9q92k6XtIKhijuuatNtNBWpNXoFVkZANHI=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sf.net; s=x ; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:References:CC:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=f8gICr5+ZNSDDhJMH/VG4+pq3wQaTEDFkrbK4hvvkzY=; b=KLRu8Ob7naAJG/5pmJbJdhaJtq mXxHYVVcFWszw7fj6xG5GL/cvxBvM8AYTM5MM6sA3UC9yrj/ZKD2wUeSN19wIm3h4uybcWlBveixL rK5oGUQQ9j8aTQkmadjUhbkhobmoxJJIsQqVo8HrXZNe8osSImMYhH3Vzr3hpHtZxg8Q=; Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.190] helo=huawei.com) by sfi-mx-1.v28.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92.2) id 1kCcy1-006BEU-3y for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 06:06:59 +0000 Received: from DGGEMS402-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.59]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 3C9F8B21441495282C45; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 14:06:48 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.136.114.67] (10.136.114.67) by smtp.huawei.com (10.3.19.202) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.487.0; Mon, 31 Aug 2020 14:06:46 +0800 To: Daeho Jeong References: <20200828054629.583577-1-daeho43@gmail.com> <61996dcd-6db1-13fc-8239-7e684f3ec49e@kernel.org> From: Chao Yu Message-ID: <78ffaf17-56a0-32bd-0bcf-212333b52f06@huawei.com> Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2020 14:06:46 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US X-Originating-IP: [10.136.114.67] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Headers-End: 1kCcy1-006BEU-3y Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: prevent compressed file from being disabled after releasing cblocks X-BeenThere: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: kernel-team@android.com, Daeho Jeong , linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On 2020/8/31 11:55, Daeho Jeong wrote: >> - open(O_RDWR) >> - ioctl(FS_IOC_SETFLAGS, F2FS_COMPR_FL) >> - write() >> - ioctl(RELEASE_COMPRESS_BLOCKS) -- inode is immutable now >> - ioctl(FS_IOC_SETFLAGS, ~F2FS_COMPR_FL) -- Should we allow to update immutable inode? >> as we know, normally, immutable inode should deny open(O_WRONLY or O_RDWR) and later update. >> > > For this case, with this patch we'll return -EINVAL for > ioctl(FS_IOC_SETFLAGS, ~F2FS_COMPR_FL). > I thought RESERVE_COMPRESS_BLOCKS ioctl is always required to get the > file to normal mode after RELEASE_COMPRESS_BLOCKS is called. That's an example, after compressed block release, shouldn't we disallow other ioctl interface which updates immutable inode? > . > _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel