From: Pali Rohár <pali@xxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2020 4:27 PM > To: Konstantin Komarov <almaz.alexandrovich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; dsterba@xxxxxxx; aaptel@xxxxxxxx; > willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; joe@xxxxxxxxxxx; mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; nborisov@xxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 08/10] fs/ntfs3: Add Kconfig, Makefile and doc > > On Friday 11 September 2020 17:10:16 Konstantin Komarov wrote: > > +Mount Options > > +============= > > + > > +The list below describes mount options supported by NTFS3 driver in addition to > > +generic ones. > > + > > +=============================================================================== > > + > > +nls=name This option informs the driver how to interpret path > > + strings and translate them to Unicode and back. If > > + this option is not set, the default codepage will be > > + used (CONFIG_NLS_DEFAULT). > > + Examples: > > + 'nls=utf8' > > + > > +nls_alt=name This option extends "nls". It will be used to translate > > + path string to Unicode if primary nls failed. > > + Examples: > > + 'nls_alt=cp1251' > > Hello! I'm looking at other filesystem drivers and no other with UNICODE > semantic (vfat, udf, isofs) has something like nls_alt option. > > So do we really need it? And if yes, it should be added to all other > UNICODE filesystem drivers for consistency. > > But I'm very sceptical if such thing is really needed. nls= option just > said how to convert UNICODE code points for userpace. This option is > passed by userspace (when mounting disk), so userspace already know what > it wanted. And it should really use this encoding for filenames (e.g. > utf8 or cp1251) which already told to kernel. Hi Pali! Thanks for the feedback. We do not consider the nls_alt option as the must have one. But it is very nice "QOL-type" mount option, which may help some amount of dual-booters/Windows users to avoid tricky fails with files originated on non-English Windows systems. One of the cases where this one may be useful is the case of zipping files with non-English names (e.g. Polish etc) under Windows and then unzipping the archive under Linux. In this case unzip will likely to fail on those files, as archive stores filenames not in utf. Windows have that "Language for non-Unicode programs" setting, which controls the encoding used for the described (and similar) cases. Overall, it's kinda niche mount option, but we suppose it's legit for Windows-originated filesystems. What do you think on this, Pali? Best regards!
