Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH v2 5/5] f2fs: use I_VERITY_BUILDING instead of private flags

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] f2fs: unconverted f2fs_verity_in_progress() calls break build in data.c
--

commit e644391a5127c3435bf66450e53975dc1299ff60
Author: Andrey Albershteyn <aalbersh@kernel.org>

f2fs: use I_VERITY_BUILDING instead of private flags

This commit removes the f2fs-private FI_VERITY_IN_PROGRESS inode flag and the
f2fs_verity_in_progress() helper in favor of the VFS I_VERITY_BUILDING flag
and fsverity_is_building().

> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> index 4fa4d8042f702..11d1cade11510 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> @@ -925,7 +925,6 @@ enum {
>  	FI_EXTRA_ATTR,		/* indicate file has extra attribute */
>  	FI_PROJ_INHERIT,	/* indicate file inherits projectid */
>  	FI_PIN_FILE,		/* indicate file should not be gced */
> -	FI_VERITY_IN_PROGRESS,	/* building fs-verity Merkle tree */
>  	FI_COMPRESSED_FILE,	/* indicate file's data can be compressed */
>  	FI_COMPRESS_CORRUPT,	/* indicate compressed cluster is corrupted */
>  	FI_MMAP_FILE,		/* indicate file was mmapped */
> @@ -3627,12 +3626,6 @@ static inline void clear_inode_flag(struct inode *inode, int flag)
>  	__mark_inode_dirty_flag(inode, flag, false);
>  }
>  
> -static inline bool f2fs_verity_in_progress(struct inode *inode)
> -{
> -	return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_FS_VERITY) &&
> -	       is_inode_flag_set(inode, FI_VERITY_IN_PROGRESS);
> -}

[Severity: Low]
As reported by Sashiko on v1 [1], does removing f2fs_verity_in_progress()
break the build in fs/f2fs/data.c when CONFIG_F2FS_FS is enabled?

Two callers in the large-folio write paths in fs/f2fs/data.c still call
f2fs_verity_in_progress(inode):

fs/f2fs/data.c:f2fs_write_cache_folios() {
	...
retry:
		pos = folio_pos(folio);
		end_pos = pos + folio_size(folio);
		isize = i_size_read(inode);
		verity_in_progress = f2fs_verity_in_progress(inode);
		poff = 0;
	...
}

and:

fs/f2fs/data.c:prepare_large_folio_write_begin() {
	...
	if (!f2fs_verity_in_progress(inode) &&
	    !(pos & (PAGE_SIZE - 1)) && (pos + len) >= i_size_read(inode)) {
	...
}

Should these two callers also be updated to use fsverity_is_building(inode)?

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/sashiko-outbox-197991@kernel.org

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261105115532.613467-1-aalbersh@kernel.org?part=5