[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20260126044432.GE30803@lst.de>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2026 05:44:32 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>, Chao Yu <chao@...nel.org>,
Andrey Albershteyn <aalbersh@...hat.com>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
fsverity@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/11] fsverity: use a hashtable to find the
fsverity_info
On Sun, Jan 25, 2026 at 09:48:22PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> Is there a reason not to do as DAX did:
> +#ifdef CONFIG_FS_VERITY
> #define S_VERITY (1 << 16) /* Verity file (using fs/verity/) */
> +#else
> +#define S_VERITY 0 /* Make all the verity checks disappear */
> +#endif
> #define S_KERNEL_FILE (1 << 17) /* File is in use by the kernel (eg. fs/cachefiles) */
> #define S_ANON_INODE (1 << 19) /* Inode is an anonymous inode */
>
>
> and then we can drop the CONFIG_FS_VERITY check here and in (at leaast)
> three other places
I looked into this, but wasn't entirely sure about all callers. Also
in at least some places we might need the barrier in fsverity_active,
so my plan was to see how many of the checks should simply be converted
to fsverity_active in a follow on and how much is left after that first.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists