Re: [PATCH RFC] f2fs: add fast symlink

From: Wanpeng Li
Date: Thu Mar 12 2015 - 05:07:55 EST

Hi Chao,
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 05:02:47PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
>Hi Wanpeng,
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Wanpeng Li []
>> Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 2:42 PM
>> To: Chao Yu
>> Cc: 'Wanpeng Li'; 'Jaegeuk Kim'; 'Changman Lee'; linux-f2fs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
>> linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] f2fs: add fast symlink
>> Hi Chao,
>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 12:17:29PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
>> >
>> >We always remain space in inode page for inline xattr data,
>> >so it's better to define our max size of fast symlink as below:
>> >
>> >
>> Thanks for your review, I just handle all your comments and it works
>> well.
>> Btw, one question, if inline xattr data area is reserved in inode
>> even if it isn't mounted w/ inline_xattr option? If yes, why it
>> is reserved?
>It's not, it keeps space in inode page only if inode is created when
>inline_xattr option is set. What I comment and suggest for
>MAX_FAST_SYMLINK_SIZE is wrong, sorry about that.
>We'd better set max size of fast symlink according to inline_xattr flag:
>static inline unsigned int max_fast_symlink_size(struct inode *inode)
> return sizeof(__le32) * addrs_per_inode(F2FS_I(inode));

Cool, this one looks more reasonable to me. I will send a newer version
of patch.

Wanpeng Li

>How do you think?
>> Regards,
>> Wanpeng Li
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at