From: Eric Sandeen Subject: Re: RFC: remove CONFIG_EXT4_FS_XATTR Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 17:04:11 -0600 Message-ID: <50BFD2EB.9070206@redhat.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Tao Ma To: "Theodore Ts'o" Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:4364 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751029Ab2LEXEH (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Dec 2012 18:04:07 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 12/5/12 4:35 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > The number of build warnings that were generated with the inline data > patch makes me think that perhaps we should just remove > CONFIG_EXT4_FS_XATTR. Turning off CONFIG_EXT4_FS_XATTR causes a net > decrease in the ext4 file system by 27k (about 7.3% if ext4 is built as > a module; the entire compiled kernel's text+data size for my > all-in-one-no-modules-for-kvm-testing is 19 megabytes). > > Another advantage of making this change is with the inline data option, > if you turn off CONFIG_EXT4_FS_XATTR, it will still allow a file system > with inline_data to be mounted, but then attempts to read small files or > small directories will end up returning EOPNOTSUPP, which will be > surprising to end users in a very serious way. (Assuming it works at > all; I haven't tested to make sure it fails cleanly, and I'm not sure > Tao has tested that case either; so easing our test matrix is another > reason why removing this config option would be helpful.) > > Does anyone have any objections or other reasons why this would be a bad > idea? It doesn't bother me; everything in my universe builds with it on. -Eric > - Ted > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >