Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 28 Oct 2019 21:44:05 +0800
From:   Gao Xiang <gaoxiang25@huawei.com>
To:     Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>
CC:     Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>, <linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org>,
        Gao Xiang <xiang@kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] erofs: support superblock checksum
Message-ID: <20191028134405.GA186556@architecture4>
References: <20191022180620.19638-1-pratikshinde320@gmail.com>
 <20191023040557.230886-1-gaoxiang25@huawei.com>
 <f158affb-c5c5-9cbe-d87d-17210bc635fe@huawei.com>
 <20191023084536.GA16289@architecture4>
 <df7d7427-e7ca-5135-5db2-640eda30d253@huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <df7d7427-e7ca-5135-5db2-640eda30d253@huawei.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Chao,

On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 08:36:00PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2019/10/23 16:45, Gao Xiang wrote:

<snip>

> > That is quite a good point. :-)
> > 
> > My first thought is to check the following payloads of sb (e.g, some per-fs
> > metadata should be checked at mount time together. or for small images, check
> > the whole image at the mount time) as well since if we introduce a new feature
> > to some kernel version, forward compatibility needs to be considered. So it's
> > better to make proper scalability, for this case, we have some choices:
> >  1) limit `chksum_blocks' upbound at runtime (e.g. refuse >= 65536 blocks,
> >     totally 256M.)
> >  2) just get rid of the whole `chksum_blocks' mess and checksum the first 4k
> >     at all, don't consider any latter scalability.
> 
> Xiang, sorry for later reply...
> 
> I prefer method 2), let's enable chksum feature only on superblock first,
> chksum_blocks feature can be added later.

Okay, got it. I will resend patch soon.

Thanks,
Gao Xiang

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> > 
> > Some perferred idea about this? I plan to release erofs-utils v1.0 tomorrow
> > and hold up this feature for the next erofs-utils release, but I think we can
> > get it ready for v5.5 since it is not quite complex feature...
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Gao Xiang
> > 
> > .
> >