On Wed, May 20, 2026 at 9:07 PM Eric Biggers <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, May 20, 2026 at 02:37:01PM +0200, Andrey Albershteyn wrote: > > fsverity now exposes fsverity_ensure_verity_info() which could be used > > instead of opening file to ensure that fsverity info is loaded and > > attached to inode. > > > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Albershteyn <[email protected]> > > Acked-by: Amir Goldstein <[email protected]> > > --- > > fs/overlayfs/util.c | 14 +++----------- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > Reviewed-by: Eric Biggers <[email protected]> > > I'm still confused by the new implementation of fsverity_active() that > got introduced by "fsverity: use a hashtable to find the fsverity_info", > though. I should have caught this during review of that commit. For > one its comment is outdated, but also the memory barrier seems to be > specific to the fsverity_get_info() caller and probably should be moved > to there. Anyway, that's not directly related to this patch.
Eric, Andrey, Did you see the Sashiko review for this patch and others in this series? https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260520123722.405752-1-aalbersh%40kernel.org It annotated some review comments as high and critical. For this patch it is about interaction with fscrypt. Please take a look and say if this is concerning or false positive. Thanks, Amir. _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
