On Tue, 3 Jul 2018, Milan Broz wrote: > On 07/03/2018 03:21 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote: > >> > >> Should we even have the possibility to stop recalculating? > >> > >> If the device was recalculating and we activate it without the > >> "recalculate" flag, what should it do? If the user reads data that haven't > >> been recalculated yet, we could: > >> 1. return an error > >> 2. ignore the non-recalculated checksum and return data > >> 3. continue with recalculating even if the flag "recalculate" is not present > >> > >> In my opinion, the option 3 is the best. Option 1 makes the device > >> unreliable and option 2 makes the device silently lose the integrity > >> protection. > > > > Yes, option 3. But you could even error out on table load; though that > > may be too unforgiving.. reality is userspace needs to account for > > staying in recalculating mode until it is complete. > > I do not think table load error is the way to go. > > Can we activate dmintegrity read-only (for example with read-only backend device) > that is not yet fully recalculated? There's no read-only activation because the journal must be replayed. Most journaled filesystems also don't provide read-only activation because they need to replay the journal. > This can needed in some recovery scenarios... (But her we can use recovery mode). > > > But to do that they'd need to monitor (similar to how snapshot-merge > > polls progress?) > > For veritysetup I will just add this to "status" command output. I added a field to the status that show the recalculate position. If recalculating was never activated, it is "-". > Milan Mikulas -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
