On Sat, 14 Feb 2026 at 12:33, Eric Biggers <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> - if (fsverity_verify_page(dic->vi, rpage))
> + if (fsverity_verify_blocks(dic->vi, page_folio(rpage),
> + PAGE_SIZE, 0))
This really is very wrong. It may be equivalent to the old code, but
the old code was *also* wrong.
If you use "page_folio()", you need to do the proper offsetting of the
page inside the folio, unless the filesystem is purely using the old
legacy "folio is the same as page", which is simply not true in f2fs.
It might be true in this particular case, but considering that it was
*NOT* true in another case I fixed up, I really don't want to see this
same mistake done over and over again.
So either it's the whole folio, in which case PAGE_SIZE is wrong.
Or it really is PAGE_SIZE, in which case you need to use the proper
offset within the folio.
Don't take the old buggy garbage that was fsverity_verify_page() and
repeat the bug when you remove it.
Linus
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
