[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5DC525E8.4060705@bfs.de>
Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2019 09:23:04 +0100
From: walter harms <wharms@....de>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
CC: linux-man@...r.kernel.org, darrick.wong@...cle.com,
dhowells@...hat.com, jaegeuk@...nel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
tytso@....edu, victorhsieh@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [man-pages RFC PATCH] statx.2: document STATX_ATTR_VERITY
Am 07.11.2019 23:02, schrieb Eric Biggers:
> From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...gle.com>
>
> Document the verity attribute for statx().
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...gle.com>
> ---
> man2/statx.2 | 4 ++++
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> RFC since the kernel patches are currently under review.
> The kernel patches can be found here:
> https://lkml.kernel.org/linux-fscrypt/20191029204141.145309-1-ebiggers@kernel.org/T/#u
>
> diff --git a/man2/statx.2 b/man2/statx.2
> index d2f1b07b8..713bd1260 100644
> --- a/man2/statx.2
> +++ b/man2/statx.2
> @@ -461,6 +461,10 @@ See
> .TP
> .B STATX_ATTR_ENCRYPTED
> A key is required for the file to be encrypted by the filesystem.
> +.TP
> +.B STATX_ATTR_VERITY
> +The file has fs-verity enabled. It cannot be written to, and all reads from it
> +will be verified against a Merkle tree.
Using "Merkle tree" opens a can of worm and what will happen when the methode will change ?
Does it matter at all ? i would suggest "filesystem" here.
re,
wh
> .SH RETURN VALUE
> On success, zero is returned.
> On error, \-1 is returned, and
Powered by blists - more mailing lists