On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 11:32 PM, Mike Snitzer <snitzer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 23 2012 at 11:17am -0400, > Kasatkin, Dmitry <dmitry.kasatkin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 4:32 PM, Mike Snitzer <snitzer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > As an aside, just curious: what does your target do? >> >> I have experimented with integrity protection. > > Interesting. Are you aware that a new integrity target has been > developed and is approaching upstream inclussion? It is called > dm-verity. > > Mikulas posted the most recent version here: > http://www.redhat.com/archives/dm-devel/2012-March/msg00133.html > > And here is the userspace setup code: > http://www.redhat.com/archives/dm-devel/2012-March/msg00134.html > > The original docs from Google's initial dm-verity are mostly applicable > (but need to be refreshed and included with the new version): > http://www.redhat.com/archives/dm-devel/2012-February/msg00119.html > > dm-verity already has 2 formats, a 3rd could be added if you found the > existing formats somehow lacking, see: > http://www.redhat.com/archives/dm-devel/2012-March/msg00143.html > > Mike Hi, Yes.. I am aware of dm-verity target. It suites well for read-only cases. It is questionable how tree-based approach will work with read-write. Each single update will cause whole tree recalculation. - Dmitry -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
