linux-kernel - Re: [NOMERGE] [RFC PATCH 00/12] erofs: introduce erofs file system

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1670077.cnVahIradn@blindfold>
Date:   Fri, 01 Jun 2018 11:28:07 +0200
From:   Richard Weinberger <richard@...ma-star.at>
To:     Gao Xiang <gaoxiang25@...wei.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, miaoxie@...wei.com,
        yuchao0@...wei.com, sunqiuyang@...wei.com, fangwei1@...wei.com,
        liguifu2@...wei.com, weidu.du@...wei.com, chen.chun.yen@...wei.com,
        brooke.wangzhigang@...ilicon.com, dongjinguang@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [NOMERGE] [RFC PATCH 00/12] erofs: introduce erofs file system

Am Freitag, 1. Juni 2018, 11:11:21 CEST schrieb Gao Xiang:
> > In which sense is it extendable?
> 
> Actually, the meaning of an enhanced (means not just read-only, but with the scalable
> on-disk layout, compression, or fs-verify in the future) read-only file system is emphasized.

ah ok.
 
> We also think of other candidate full names, such as
> Enhanced / Extented Read-only File System, all the names short for "erofs" are okay.

TBH, I read "erofs" as "error fs". ;-)

> > How does it compare to existing read only filesystems, such as squashfs?
> > 
> 
> You are quite right.
> 
> We are now focusing on improving our decompression subsystem and
> these numbers will be successively added in the future non-RFC patches.
> 
> We haven't pay much attention on comparing squashfs and erofs
> yet since we once tried to use squashfs on our products with
> different block sizes several years ago, it behaves
> unacceptable in the low free memory scenario besides its
> performance.

I'm interested in the comparison because I use squashfs often
for embedded devices on top of ubiblock (raw nand).
If there is something that can do better, I'm all for it.

Thanks,
//richard

-- 
sigma star gmbh - Eduard-Bodem-Gasse 6 - 6020 Innsbruck - Austria
ATU66964118 - FN 374287y