Re: [PATCH 28/29] xfs: allow verity files to be opened even if the fsverity metadata is damaged

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 12:59:22PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 06:39:03PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 08:10:15PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> > > >> I hesitate to say it but maybe there should be some ioctl for online
> > > >> repair use cases only, or perhaps a new O_NOVERITY special flag to
> > > >> openat2()?
> > > >
> > > > "openat2 but without meddling from the VFS"?  Tempting... ;)
> > > 
> > > Or really any lower level even filesystem-specific API for the online
> > > fsck case.  Adding a blanket new special case for all CAP_SYS_ADMIN
> > > processes covers a lot of things that don't need that.
> > 
> > I suppose there could be an O_NOVALIDATION to turn off data checksum
> > validation on btrfs/bcachefs too.  But then you'd want to careful
> > controls on who gets to use it.  Maybe not liblzma_la-crc64-fast.o.
> 
> Just use XFS_IOC_OPEN_BY_HANDLE same as xfs_fsr and xfsdump do. The
> handle can be build in userspace from the inode bulkstat
> information, and for typical inode contents verification purposes we
> don't actually need path-based open access to the inodes. That would
> then mean we can simple add our own open flag to return a fd that
> can do data operations that short-circuit verification...

Heh, ok.  Are there any private flags that get passed via
xfs_fsop_handlereq_t::oflags?  Or does that mean defining a top level
O_FLAG that cannot be passed through openat but /can/ be sent via
open_by_handle?

--D

> Cheers,
> 
> Dave.
> -- 
> Dave Chinner
> david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 




[Index of Archives]     [XFS Filesystem Development (older mail)]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Trails]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux