From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86DB7C54EBD for ; Wed, 4 Jan 2023 07:25:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230416AbjADHZZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jan 2023 02:25:25 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:38406 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230387AbjADHZY (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jan 2023 02:25:24 -0500 Received: from ams.source.kernel.org (ams.source.kernel.org [145.40.68.75]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D022A44D; Tue, 3 Jan 2023 23:25:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B2E51B811A3; Wed, 4 Jan 2023 07:25:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1AFCBC433D2; Wed, 4 Jan 2023 07:25:20 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1672817120; bh=EY0QIS6ah2VRlLsuBHHzFqCxhBDp5eEMXYtwzaAjNBw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Y8eevhPlbLQQByJxtZSN0ftIYXlnqoyA5BJUM6AP5KbL8Hdw0HMg2nuBQ5sdlamXc LExL2VFObRchVEVgRsCm15mnz4C6rXRbtTsMN2cr4b6oRiHMmmABbSNflU3EWaJhst 5J1PEpb3DqjERtGwRqlzrEMz3WeV19T0b43MtEWOjh9knfnp7tviL6qmTp7aHZSXLT IEN/P6uhszJ2K9eZEk+XPP3yijgHtnJlqNNbbV7wSwv2r5oqXKVzoj6Y3IR7JL9E+a vEiPUYFi+z+qSUbJ0/w3bVi8IcSNUBhhDXmmHc9rII8AQDlMi9JWlYLQi6CtdvuVhT N9g/5kMqBLp7w== Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2023 23:25:18 -0800 From: Eric Biggers To: Ojaswin Mujoo Cc: linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, Andrey Albershteyn Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/11] fsverity: support for non-4K pages Message-ID: References: <20221223203638.41293-1-ebiggers@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 04, 2023 at 12:08:09PM +0530, Ojaswin Mujoo wrote: > Hi Eric, > > I have roughly gone through the series and run the (patched) xfstests on > this patchset on a powerpc machine with 64k pagesize and 64k,4k and 1k > merkle tree size on EXT4 and everything seems to work correctly. > > Just for records, test generic/692 takes a lot of time to complete with > 64k merkel tree size due to the calculations assuming it to be 4k, > however I was able to manually test that particular scenario. (I'll try > to send a patch to fix the fstest later). > > Anyways, feel free to add: > > Tested-by: Ojaswin Mujoo > > Since I was not very familiar with the fsverty codebase, I'll try to > take some more time to review the code and get back with any > comments/RVBs. > > Regards, > ojaswin Thanks Ojaswin! That's a good point about generic/692. The right fix for it is to make it use $FSV_BLOCK_SIZE instead of 4K in its calculations. I suppose you saw that issue by running the test on ext4 with fs_block_size == page_size == 64K, causing xfstests to use merkle_tree_block_size == 64K by default. Thanks for doing that; that's something I haven't been able to test yet. My focus has been on merkle_tree_block_size < page_size. merkle_tree_block_size > 4K should just work, though, assuming merkle_tree_block_size <= min(fs_block_size, page_size). (Or merkle_tree_block_size == fs_block_size == page_size before this patch series.) - Eric From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.sourceforge.net (lists.sourceforge.net [216.105.38.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 003D1C46467 for ; Wed, 4 Jan 2023 07:25:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=sfs-ml-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com) by sfs-ml-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from ) id 1pCy9R-0004my-Ud; Wed, 04 Jan 2023 07:25:29 +0000 Received: from [172.30.20.202] (helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from ) id 1pCy9Q-0004mn-Ir for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 04 Jan 2023 07:25:28 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceforge.net; s=x; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=cceV+AtJ9MtZMomS+IjwOz6z8srT60OwVpOFRGB8GZM=; b=EmpTCJjX1F7Jn3jHnKc3uRN+yr o9syHlEnMG4yQdJyOSYqQYwYTplPGMS95zIpDzRByB9WD6FyY8AHX2/AmUiBS7/ga7Xht0wy+AR6i ArrO25sbgCC/RwR/GzeTZLPhlnz+ndGgw8vaEGsiEdeHkegDkZCvucJsr4utsYYBuz9I=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sf.net; s=x ; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To :From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=cceV+AtJ9MtZMomS+IjwOz6z8srT60OwVpOFRGB8GZM=; b=mdD4eaCsKt4baLta+iQTi1jYFJ I6rX+1QxdVcCMOmheLAFfDMzLKx6VESBUiG2bcP9pHLfx2AUVAk6DJoS/TJ3FjIlFLL4Z1l8AccKt qxMq1cEhLrsrLTuq7yJv9ysuujW2lD18XYZaNM+NamonaV1uubjbzsRMsf89HBTanIHg=; Received: from ams.source.kernel.org ([145.40.68.75]) by sfi-mx-2.v28.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.95) id 1pCy9P-00080W-T1 for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 04 Jan 2023 07:25:28 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9EA78B8119A; Wed, 4 Jan 2023 07:25:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1AFCBC433D2; Wed, 4 Jan 2023 07:25:20 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1672817120; bh=EY0QIS6ah2VRlLsuBHHzFqCxhBDp5eEMXYtwzaAjNBw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Y8eevhPlbLQQByJxtZSN0ftIYXlnqoyA5BJUM6AP5KbL8Hdw0HMg2nuBQ5sdlamXc LExL2VFObRchVEVgRsCm15mnz4C6rXRbtTsMN2cr4b6oRiHMmmABbSNflU3EWaJhst 5J1PEpb3DqjERtGwRqlzrEMz3WeV19T0b43MtEWOjh9knfnp7tviL6qmTp7aHZSXLT IEN/P6uhszJ2K9eZEk+XPP3yijgHtnJlqNNbbV7wSwv2r5oqXKVzoj6Y3IR7JL9E+a vEiPUYFi+z+qSUbJ0/w3bVi8IcSNUBhhDXmmHc9rII8AQDlMi9JWlYLQi6CtdvuVhT N9g/5kMqBLp7w== Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2023 23:25:18 -0800 From: Eric Biggers To: Ojaswin Mujoo Message-ID: References: <20221223203638.41293-1-ebiggers@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Headers-End: 1pCy9P-00080W-T1 Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH v2 00/11] fsverity: support for non-4K pages X-BeenThere: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Andrey Albershteyn , linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On Wed, Jan 04, 2023 at 12:08:09PM +0530, Ojaswin Mujoo wrote: > Hi Eric, > > I have roughly gone through the series and run the (patched) xfstests on > this patchset on a powerpc machine with 64k pagesize and 64k,4k and 1k > merkle tree size on EXT4 and everything seems to work correctly. > > Just for records, test generic/692 takes a lot of time to complete with > 64k merkel tree size due to the calculations assuming it to be 4k, > however I was able to manually test that particular scenario. (I'll try > to send a patch to fix the fstest later). > > Anyways, feel free to add: > > Tested-by: Ojaswin Mujoo > > Since I was not very familiar with the fsverty codebase, I'll try to > take some more time to review the code and get back with any > comments/RVBs. > > Regards, > ojaswin Thanks Ojaswin! That's a good point about generic/692. The right fix for it is to make it use $FSV_BLOCK_SIZE instead of 4K in its calculations. I suppose you saw that issue by running the test on ext4 with fs_block_size == page_size == 64K, causing xfstests to use merkle_tree_block_size == 64K by default. Thanks for doing that; that's something I haven't been able to test yet. My focus has been on merkle_tree_block_size < page_size. merkle_tree_block_size > 4K should just work, though, assuming merkle_tree_block_size <= min(fs_block_size, page_size). (Or merkle_tree_block_size == fs_block_size == page_size before this patch series.) - Eric _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel