On 2025/4/29 11:54, Gao Xiang wrote:
On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 11:46:39AM +0800, Hongbo Li wrote:
...
Another thing is that I'm not sure if "user_xattr" option is really
needed, we might just kill this option since all recent fses don't
have such configuration and user_xattrs should be suppo
On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 11:46:39AM +0800, Hongbo Li wrote:
...
> >
> > Another thing is that I'm not sure if "user_xattr" option is really
> > needed, we might just kill this option since all recent fses don't
> > have such configuration and user_xattrs should be supported by default.
> >
> Yea
On 2025/4/28 23:16, Gao Xiang wrote:
On Mon, Apr 28, 2025 at 02:25:45PM +, Hongbo Li wrote:
Some options are supported depending on different compiling config,
and these option will not fail during mount if they are not
supported. This is very weird, so we can reject them if they are
not
On Mon, Apr 28, 2025 at 02:25:45PM +, Hongbo Li wrote:
> Some options are supported depending on different compiling config,
> and these option will not fail during mount if they are not
> supported. This is very weird, so we can reject them if they are
> not supported.
>
If it's an invalid o
Some options are supported depending on different compiling config,
and these option will not fail during mount if they are not
supported. This is very weird, so we can reject them if they are
not supported.
Signed-off-by: Hongbo Li
---
fs/erofs/super.c | 39 ++---
