From: Boris Burkov <boris@bur.io>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com,
linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] btrfs: add compat_flags to btrfs_inode_item
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 16:29:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210315232936.GA3610049@devbig008.ftw2.facebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YE/orPeVtRAON9II@gmail.com>
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 04:07:24PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 11:26:29AM -0800, Boris Burkov wrote:
> > The tree checker currently rejects unrecognized flags when it reads
> > btrfs_inode_item. Practically, this means that adding a new flag makes
> > the change backwards incompatible if the flag is ever set on a file.
> >
> > Take up one of the 4 reserved u64 fields in the btrfs_inode_item as a
> > new "compat_flags". These flags are zero on inode creation in btrfs and
> > mkfs and are ignored by an older kernel, so it should be safe to use
> > them in this way.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Boris Burkov <boris@bur.io>
>
> How does this interact with the RO_COMPAT filesystem flag which is also being
> added?
>
> - Eric
This allows us to mount at all -- without it, when mounting on an older
system, the logic in fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c would see an unexpected
inode flag value and reject the filesystem entirely.
The RO_COMPAT flag represents the decision to mount RO rather than RW
when a verity file is present (though it suffers from the fact that it
gets set on verity enable, but not unset when the last verity file is
deleted)
I'm now thinking that ro_compat inode flags might be an interesting
option where the tree-checker could indicate we have to mount read only
if it sees an unrecognized value.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-15 23:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-05 19:26 [PATCH v2 0/5] btrfs: support fsverity Boris Burkov
2021-03-05 19:26 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] btrfs: add compat_flags to btrfs_inode_item Boris Burkov
2021-03-15 23:07 ` Eric Biggers
2021-03-15 23:29 ` Boris Burkov [this message]
2021-03-05 19:26 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] btrfs: initial fsverity support Boris Burkov
2021-03-07 7:13 ` kernel test robot
2021-03-15 23:17 ` Eric Biggers
2021-03-16 0:42 ` Boris Burkov
2021-03-16 0:57 ` Eric Biggers
2021-03-16 18:44 ` Eric Biggers
2021-03-05 19:26 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] btrfs: check verity for reads of inline extents and holes Boris Burkov
2021-03-05 19:26 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] btrfs: fallback to buffered io for verity files Boris Burkov
2021-03-05 19:26 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] btrfs: verity metadata orphan items Boris Burkov
2021-03-15 23:09 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] btrfs: support fsverity Eric Biggers
2021-03-15 23:47 ` Boris Burkov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210315232936.GA3610049@devbig008.ftw2.facebook.com \
--to=boris@bur.io \
--cc=ebiggers@kernel.org \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).