On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 5:28 AM Eric Biggers <ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 10:57:59AM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 01:41:34PM +0200, Alexander Larsson wrote: > > > > Can you consider > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230612190047.59755-1-ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx which would > > > > make fsverity_get_digest() support both types of IDs? Then you can use > > > > FS_VERITY_HASH_ALG_*, which I think would make things slightly easier for you. > > > > > > Sounds very good to me. I'll rebase the patchset on top of it. Not > > > sure how to best land this though, are you ok with this landing via > > > overlayfs-next? > > > > If you're confident that this series will land in v6.4, then sure, you can apply > > my patch "fsverity: rework fsverity_get_digest() again" to overlayfs-next, > > instead of me taking it through fsverity/for-next. (Hopefully the IMA > > maintainer will ack it as well, as it touches security/integrity/.) > > > > Just be careful about being overly-optimistic about features landing in the next > > release. I've had experience with cases like this before, where I didn't apply > > something for a reason like this, but then the series didn't make it in right > > away so it was worse than me just taking the patch in the first place. > > > > I do see that the other prerequisites were just applied to overlayfs-next, so > > maybe this is good to go now. It's up to the other overlayfs folks. > > I meant to say 6.5, not 6.4. > > Anyway, just let me know if I should apply it or not, before it gets too late. Honestly, I have no idea about the timescale here. That is all up to miklos really. Maybe best to do as amir say and take it through your tree but on from a branch that milklos can merge into overlafs-next if he wants to take it this cycle. -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Alexander Larsson Red Hat, Inc alexl@xxxxxxxxxx alexander.larsson@xxxxxxxxx
