Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-ext4+bounces-62-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 00:12:15 -0500
From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
        Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@suse.de>, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
        linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, ebiggers@kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, jaegeuk@kernel.org,
        linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH v6 0/9] Support negative dentries on
 case-insensitive ext4 and f2fs
Message-ID: <20231121051215.GA335601@mit.edu>
References: <20230816050803.15660-1-krisman@suse.de>
 <20231025-selektiert-leibarzt-5d0070d85d93@brauner>
 <655a9634.630a0220.d50d7.5063SMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@mx.google.com>
 <20231120-nihilismus-verehren-f2b932b799e0@brauner>
 <CAHk-=whTCWwfmSzv3uVLN286_WZ6coN-GNw=4DWja7NZzp5ytg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20231121020254.GB291888@mit.edu>
 <CAHk-=whb80quGmmgVcsq51cXw9dQ9EfNMi9otL9eh34jVZaD2g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=wh+o0Zkzn=mtF6nB1b-EEcod-y4+ZWtAe7=Mi1v7RjUpg@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wh+o0Zkzn=mtF6nB1b-EEcod-y4+ZWtAe7=Mi1v7RjUpg@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 07:03:13PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Nov 2023 at 18:29, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > It's a bit complicated, yes. But no, doing things one unicode
> > character at a time is just bad bad bad.
> 
> Put another way: the _point_ of UTF-8 is that ASCII is still ASCII.
> It's literally why UTF-8 doesn't suck.
> 
> So you can still compare ASCII strings as-is.
> 
> No, that doesn't help people who are really using other locales, and
> are actively using complicated characters.
> 
> But it very much does mean that you can compare "Bad" and "bad" and
> never ever look at any unicode translation ever.

Yeah, agreed, that would be a nice optimization.  However, in the
unfortunate case where (a) it's non-ASCII, and (b) the input string is
non-normalized and/or differs in case, we end up scanning some portion
of the two strings twice; once doing the strcmp, and once doing the
Unicode slow path.

That being said, given that even in the case where we're dealing with
non-ASCII strings, in the fairly common case where the program is
doing a readdir() followed by a open() or stat(), the filename will be
byte-identical and so a strcmp() will suffice.

So I agree that it's a nice optimization.  It'd be interesting how
much such an optimization would actually show up in various
benchmarks.  It'd have to be something that was really metadata-heavy,
or else the filenamea lookups would get drowned out.

   	    	      	      	    	- Ted