Return-Path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.133]:35196 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726604AbeLUQem (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Dec 2018 11:34:42 -0500 Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2018 08:34:38 -0800 From: Matthew Wilcox To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" , Christoph Hellwig , Dave Chinner , "Darrick J. Wong" , Eric Biggers , linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jaegeuk Kim , Victor Hsieh , Chandan Rajendra , Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/12] fs-verity: add a documentation file Message-ID: <20181221163438.GE10600@bombadil.infradead.org> References: <20181219071420.GC2628@infradead.org> <20181219021953.GD31274@dastard> <20181219193005.GB6889@mit.edu> <20181219213552.GO6311@dastard> <20181220220158.GC2360@mit.edu> <20181221070447.GA21687@infradead.org> <20181221154714.GA26547@mit.edu> <20181221155354.GC10600@bombadil.infradead.org> <20181221162813.GB26547@mit.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181221162813.GB26547@mit.edu> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 11:28:13AM -0500, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 07:53:54AM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > In contrast to "we'll just fix it up later" (which usually applies > > to in-kernel interfaces), we have a policy of not breaking userspace, > > so accepting this interface means setting it in stone. We should get > > it right. > > I'm not convinced it's a "fix", but my point is that if later on you > want to add extra complexity transforming > > ioctl(fd, FS_IOC_ENABLE_VERITY); > > so it does the equivalent of > > ioctl(fd, FS_IOC_ENABLE_VERITY_NOW_WITH_EXTRA_USELESS_COMPLEXITY, > fd, sizeof_data, sizeof_verity_data); I disagree with your EXTRA_USELESS_COMPLEXITY appendage. The interface you designed reflects the implementation you did in ext4, so I understand why it seems simple from your point of view. From the user point of view, it looks completely weird. You write a file, being a series of bytes, then all of a sudden have to know that it's composed of blocks, seek to the next block, write a header, then this Merkle data structure, then write a footer which isn't allowed to cross a block boundary for some unknowable reason. It seems much more logical to have the header+Merkle+footer as a separate data stream which the filesystem can then layout according to its own rules.