[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4058c0b9-d940-f069-8b31-39cd7ae16062@collabora.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2021 17:47:12 -0300
From: André Almeida <andrealmeid@...labora.com>
To: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@...labora.com>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, smcv@...labora.com,
kernel@...labora.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Daniel Rosenberg <drosen@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] docs: tmpfs: Add casefold options
Hi Gabriel,
Às 19:19 de 23/03/21, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi escreveu:
> André Almeida <andrealmeid@...labora.com> writes:
>
>> Document mounting options to enable casefold support in tmpfs.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: André Almeida <andrealmeid@...labora.com>
>> ---
>> Documentation/filesystems/tmpfs.rst | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/tmpfs.rst b/Documentation/filesystems/tmpfs.rst
>> index 0408c245785e..84c87c309bd7 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/filesystems/tmpfs.rst
>> +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/tmpfs.rst
>> @@ -170,6 +170,32 @@ So 'mount -t tmpfs -o size=10G,nr_inodes=10k,mode=700 tmpfs /mytmpfs'
>> will give you tmpfs instance on /mytmpfs which can allocate 10GB
>> RAM/SWAP in 10240 inodes and it is only accessible by root.
>>
>> +tmpfs has the following mounting options for case-insesitive lookups support:
>> +
>> +========= ==============================================================
>> +casefold Enable casefold support at this mount point using the given
>> + argument as enconding. Currently only utf8 encondings are supported.
>> +cf_strict Enable strict casefolding at this mouting point (disabled by
>> + default). This means that invalid strings should be reject by the
>> + file system.
>
> strict mode refers to the encoding, not exactly casefold. Maybe we
> could have a parameter encoding_flags that accepts the flag 'strict'.
> This would make it closer to the ext4 interface.
What are the other enconding flags? Or is this more about having a
properly extensible interface?
> Alternatively, call this option strict_encoding.
>
Thanks,
André
Powered by blists - more mailing lists