[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151207145814.GB29457@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 09:58:14 -0500
From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>
To: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
Cc: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>,
Mandeep Baines <msb@...omium.org>,
Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>,
Alasdair Kergon <agk@...hat.com>, dm-devel@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@...gle.com>,
Milan Broz <mbroz@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] dm verity: add support for error correction
On Mon, Dec 07 2015 at 8:21am -0500,
Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 04:09:35PM -0500, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > I'd really appreciate it if you could do some regression testing,
> > etc on your end to verify I didn't break anything while tweaking
> > things.
>
> Sure. The changes look fine. I applied them to my tree and everything
> still works as expected in my tests.
Great. Moving forward it'd be awesome if you could work to get your
verity FEC support regression tests into cryptsetup's tests. We need a
way to verify future DM and/or other kernel changes don't somehow cause
this FEC support to regress.
Also, I know you said you'd be getting Milan a veritysetup patch soon.
How are things going on that? Ideally that'll land in conjunction with
the kernel's dm-verity FEC support.
> Thanks for taking the time to review the patches!
No problem, like I said I'll be reviewing the code further but at this
point your changes seem to be on-track for upstream Linux 4.5
inclusion.
Mike
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists