Hi Darrick, On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 04:59:38PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > diff --git a/fs/ext4/ext4.h b/fs/ext4/ext4.h > > index 1cb67859e0518b..5a1deea3fb3e37 100644 > > --- a/fs/ext4/ext4.h > > +++ b/fs/ext4/ext4.h > > @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ > > #endif > > > > #include <linux/fscrypt.h> > > +#include <linux/fsverity.h> > > > > #include <linux/compiler.h> > > > > @@ -395,6 +396,7 @@ struct flex_groups { > > #define EXT4_TOPDIR_FL 0x00020000 /* Top of directory hierarchies*/ > > #define EXT4_HUGE_FILE_FL 0x00040000 /* Set to each huge file */ > > #define EXT4_EXTENTS_FL 0x00080000 /* Inode uses extents */ > > +#define EXT4_VERITY_FL 0x00100000 /* Verity protected inode */ > > Hmm, a new inode flag, superblock rocompat feature flag, and > (presumably) the Merkle tree has some sort of well defined format which > starts at the next 64k boundary past EOF. > > Would you mind updating the relevant parts of the ondisk format > documentation in Documentation/filesystems/ext4/, please? > > I saw that the Merkle tree and verity descriptor formats themselves are > documented in the first patch, so you could simply link the ext4 > documentation to it. > Sure, I'll update the ext4 documentation. > > +/* > > + * Read some verity metadata from the inode. __vfs_read() can't be used because > > + * we need to read beyond i_size. > > + */ > > +static int pagecache_read(struct inode *inode, void *buf, size_t count, > > + loff_t pos) > > +{ > > + while (count) { > > + size_t n = min_t(size_t, count, > > + PAGE_SIZE - offset_in_page(pos)); > > + struct page *page; > > + void *addr; > > + > > + page = read_mapping_page(inode->i_mapping, pos >> PAGE_SHIFT, > > + NULL); > > + if (IS_ERR(page)) > > + return PTR_ERR(page); > > + > > + addr = kmap_atomic(page); > > + memcpy(buf, addr + offset_in_page(pos), n); > > + kunmap_atomic(addr); > > + > > + put_page(page); > > + > > + buf += n; > > + pos += n; > > + count -= n; > > + } > > + return 0; > > +} > > + > > +/* > > + * Write some verity metadata to the inode for FS_IOC_ENABLE_VERITY. > > + * kernel_write() can't be used because the file descriptor is readonly. > > + */ > > +static int pagecache_write(struct inode *inode, const void *buf, size_t count, > > + loff_t pos) > > +{ > > + while (count) { > > + size_t n = min_t(size_t, count, > > + PAGE_SIZE - offset_in_page(pos)); > > + struct page *page; > > + void *fsdata; > > + void *addr; > > + int res; > > + > > + res = pagecache_write_begin(NULL, inode->i_mapping, pos, n, 0, > > + &page, &fsdata); > > + if (res) > > + return res; > > + > > + addr = kmap_atomic(page); > > + memcpy(addr + offset_in_page(pos), buf, n); > > + kunmap_atomic(addr); > > + > > + res = pagecache_write_end(NULL, inode->i_mapping, pos, n, n, > > + page, fsdata); > > + if (res < 0) > > + return res; > > + if (res != n) > > + return -EIO; > > + > > + buf += n; > > + pos += n; > > + count -= n; > > + } > > + return 0; > > +} > > This same code is duplicated in the f2fs patch. Is there a reason why > they don't share this common code? Even if you have to hide it under > fs/verity/ ? > Yes, pagecache_read() and pagecache_write() are identical between ext4 and f2fs. I didn't put them in fs/verity/ because the "metadata past EOF" approach is a choice of ext4 and f2fs and not intrinsic to the fs-verity feature itself, so to avoid confusion I made the fs/verity/ support layer be completely clean of any assumption that that's the way filesystems implement fs-verity. Also, making the fsverity_operations call back into fs/verity/ adds a little extra conceptual complexity about what belongs where, since then we'd have a call stack of filesystem => fs/verity/ => filesystem => fs/verity/. But if people would rather that ext4 and f2fs share these two functions anyway, then sure, we could move them into fs/verity/, and other filesystems (if they take a different approach to fs-verity) simply won't use them. - Eric