[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAL7ro1GuPZE8ek=uvfHEqGFrbbt=NO1=oO8_B-dVBF9go=StSg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2023 09:44:43 +0200
From: Alexander Larsson <alexl@...hat.com>
To: Jingbo Xu <jefflexu@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: hsiangkao@...ux.alibaba.com, chao@...nel.org, huyue2@...lpad.com,
linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] erofs: boost negative xattr lookup with bloom filter
On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 9:04 AM Jingbo Xu <jefflexu@...ux.alibaba.com> wrote:
>
> The bit value for the bloom filter map has a reverse semantics for
> compatibility. That is, the bit value of 0 indicates existence, while
> the bit value of 1 indicates the absence of corresponding xattr.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jingbo Xu <jefflexu@...ux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> fs/erofs/internal.h | 2 ++
> fs/erofs/xattr.c | 12 ++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/erofs/internal.h b/fs/erofs/internal.h
> index 36e32fa542f0..7e447b48a46b 100644
> --- a/fs/erofs/internal.h
> +++ b/fs/erofs/internal.h
> @@ -251,6 +251,7 @@ EROFS_FEATURE_FUNCS(fragments, incompat, INCOMPAT_FRAGMENTS)
> EROFS_FEATURE_FUNCS(dedupe, incompat, INCOMPAT_DEDUPE)
> EROFS_FEATURE_FUNCS(xattr_prefixes, incompat, INCOMPAT_XATTR_PREFIXES)
> EROFS_FEATURE_FUNCS(sb_chksum, compat, COMPAT_SB_CHKSUM)
> +EROFS_FEATURE_FUNCS(xattr_filter, compat, COMPAT_XATTR_FILTER)
>
> /* atomic flag definitions */
> #define EROFS_I_EA_INITED_BIT 0
> @@ -270,6 +271,7 @@ struct erofs_inode {
> unsigned char inode_isize;
> unsigned int xattr_isize;
>
> + unsigned long xattr_name_filter;
> unsigned int xattr_shared_count;
> unsigned int *xattr_shared_xattrs;
>
> diff --git a/fs/erofs/xattr.c b/fs/erofs/xattr.c
> index 40178b6e0688..1137723303d3 100644
> --- a/fs/erofs/xattr.c
> +++ b/fs/erofs/xattr.c
> @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
> * Copyright (C) 2021-2022, Alibaba Cloud
> */
> #include <linux/security.h>
> +#include <linux/xxhash.h>
> #include "xattr.h"
>
> struct erofs_xattr_iter {
> @@ -87,6 +88,7 @@ static int erofs_init_inode_xattrs(struct inode *inode)
> }
>
> ih = it.kaddr + erofs_blkoff(sb, it.pos);
> + vi->xattr_name_filter = le32_to_cpu(ih->h_name_filter);
> vi->xattr_shared_count = ih->h_shared_count;
> vi->xattr_shared_xattrs = kmalloc_array(vi->xattr_shared_count,
> sizeof(uint), GFP_KERNEL);
> @@ -392,7 +394,10 @@ int erofs_getxattr(struct inode *inode, int index, const char *name,
> void *buffer, size_t buffer_size)
> {
> int ret;
> + uint32_t bit;
> struct erofs_xattr_iter it;
> + struct erofs_inode *vi = EROFS_I(inode);
> + struct erofs_sb_info *sbi = EROFS_SB(inode->i_sb);
>
> if (!name)
> return -EINVAL;
> @@ -401,6 +406,13 @@ int erofs_getxattr(struct inode *inode, int index, const char *name,
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> + if (erofs_sb_has_xattr_filter(sbi)) {
As I said in my other mail. I would really like this to just always do
the filter check. It should be safe as older fs:es have zero in place
here, and doing this allows me to create composefs images with the
bloom filters that also work with older kernels.
> + bit = xxh32(name, strlen(name), EROFS_XATTR_FILTER_SEED + index);
> + bit &= EROFS_XATTR_FILTER_MASK;
> + if (test_bit(bit, &vi->xattr_name_filter))
> + return -ENOATTR;
> + }
> +
> it.index = index;
> it.name = (struct qstr)QSTR_INIT(name, strlen(name));
> if (it.name.len > EROFS_NAME_LEN)
> --
> 2.19.1.6.gb485710b
>
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Alexander Larsson Red Hat, Inc
alexl@...hat.com alexander.larsson@...il.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists