Yes, your understanding is correct. I'm off at the moment, we will try and
open a PR sometime to explain it better.
By the way I'd also happily review your PR also if you think you could
explain it better.
At the moment it's a loopback mounted file from /boot, mounted as an erofs
with transient
On Do, 14.12.23 02:17, Nils Kattenbeck (nilskem...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 10:03 AM Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
> >
> > On Di, 12.12.23 23:01, Nils Kattenbeck (nilskem...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >
> > > > sysexts are erofs or squashfs file systems with verity backing. Only
> > >
On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 10:03 AM Lennart Poettering
wrote:
>
> On Di, 12.12.23 23:01, Nils Kattenbeck (nilskem...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> > > sysexts are erofs or squashfs file systems with verity backing. Only
> > > the sectors you access are decompressed.
> >
> > Okay I forgot that they were
On Di, 12.12.23 23:01, Nils Kattenbeck (nilskem...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > sysexts are erofs or squashfs file systems with verity backing. Only
> > the sectors you access are decompressed.
>
> Okay I forgot that they were erofs based and mentioned cpio archives
> so I assumed they would be one.
>
On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 10:02 PM Lennart Poettering
wrote:
>
> If you have 7 cpio initrds then the kernel will allocate a tmpfs and
> unpack them all into it, one after the other, on top of each other,
> and then jumps into the result.
>
> if you have an erofs and 7 cpio initds, what are you
On Di, 12.12.23 21:34, Nils Kattenbeck (nilskem...@gmail.com) wrote:
> Hi, while I have been following this thread passively for now I also
> wanted to chime in.
>
> > (The main reason why sd-stub doesn't actually support erofs-initrds,
> > is that sd-stub also generates initrd cpios on the fly,
On Tue, 12 Dec 2023 at 20:35, Nils Kattenbeck wrote:
>
> Hi, while I have been following this thread passively for now I also
> wanted to chime in.
>
> > (The main reason why sd-stub doesn't actually support erofs-initrds,
> > is that sd-stub also generates initrd cpios on the fly, to pass
> >
Hi, while I have been following this thread passively for now I also
wanted to chime in.
> (The main reason why sd-stub doesn't actually support erofs-initrds,
> is that sd-stub also generates initrd cpios on the fly, to pass
> credentials and system extension images to the kernel, and you can't
On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 06:40:32PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mo, 11.12.23 12:48, Eric Curtin (ecur...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> > Although the nice thing about a storage-init like approach is there's
> > basically zero copies up front. What storage-init is trying to be, is
> > a tool to
On Tue, 12 Dec 2023 at 12:38, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Mo, 11.12.23 12:48, Eric Curtin (ecur...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> > Sort of yes, but preferably using that __initramfs_start /
> > initrd_start buffer as is without copying any bytes anywhere else and
> > without teaching the bootloaders
On Mo, 11.12.23 17:03, Eric Curtin (ecur...@redhat.com) wrote:
> A generic approach is hard, I think it's worth discussing which type of boots
> you should actually care about milliseconds of performance for. It would be
> nice
> if we had an init system that contained the binary data to do the
On Mo, 11.12.23 11:28, Demi Marie Obenour (d...@invisiblethingslab.com) wrote:
> I don't think this is "a pretty specific solution to one set of devices"
> _at all_. To the contrary, it is _exactly_ what I want to see desktop
> systems moving to in the future.
>
> It solves the problem of large
On Mo, 11.12.23 12:48, Eric Curtin (ecur...@redhat.com) wrote:
> Although the nice thing about a storage-init like approach is there's
> basically zero copies up front. What storage-init is trying to be, is
> a tool to just call systemd storage things, without also inheriting
> all the systemd
On Mo, 11.12.23 12:48, Eric Curtin (ecur...@redhat.com) wrote:
> Sort of yes, but preferably using that __initramfs_start /
> initrd_start buffer as is without copying any bytes anywhere else and
> without teaching the bootloaders to do things.
>
> The "memmap=" approach you suggested sounds like
[Sorry for the spam to the people in Cc. Now the real address.]
Dear Luca,
Am 11.12.23 um 22:45 schrieb Luca Boccassi:
> On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 21:20, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 08:58:58PM +, Luca Boccassi wrote:
>>> On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 20:43, Demi Marie
On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 21:20, Demi Marie Obenour
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 08:58:58PM +, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 20:43, Demi Marie Obenour
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > > Hash: SHA512
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at
On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 20:59, Luca Boccassi wrote:
>
> On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 20:43, Demi Marie Obenour
> wrote:
> >
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA512
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 08:15:27PM +, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > > On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 17:30, Demi Marie
On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 08:58:58PM +, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 20:43, Demi Marie Obenour
> wrote:
> >
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA512
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 08:15:27PM +, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > > On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 17:30, Demi
On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 20:43, Demi Marie Obenour
wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 08:15:27PM +, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 17:30, Demi Marie Obenour
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 10:57:58AM +0100,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 08:15:27PM +, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 17:30, Demi Marie Obenour
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 10:57:58AM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > > On Fr, 08.12.23 17:59, Eric Curtin
On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 17:30, Demi Marie Obenour
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 10:57:58AM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > On Fr, 08.12.23 17:59, Eric Curtin (ecur...@redhat.com) wrote:
> >
> > > Here is the boot sequence with initoverlayfs integrated, the
> > > mini-initramfs contains
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 05:03:13PM +, Eric Curtin wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 16:36, Demi Marie Obenour
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 10:57:58AM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > > On Fr, 08.12.23 17:59, Eric Curtin
On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 12:30 PM Demi Marie Obenour
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 10:57:58AM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > On Fr, 08.12.23 17:59, Eric Curtin (ecur...@redhat.com) wrote:
> >
> > > Here is the boot sequence with initoverlayfs integrated, the
> > > mini-initramfs
On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 16:36, Demi Marie Obenour
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 10:57:58AM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > On Fr, 08.12.23 17:59, Eric Curtin (ecur...@redhat.com) wrote:
> >
> > > Here is the boot sequence with initoverlayfs integrated, the
> > > mini-initramfs contains
On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 10:57:58AM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Fr, 08.12.23 17:59, Eric Curtin (ecur...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> > Here is the boot sequence with initoverlayfs integrated, the
> > mini-initramfs contains just enough to get storage drivers loaded and
> > storage devices
On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 12:48, Eric Curtin wrote:
>
> On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 11:51, Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mo, 11.12.23 11:28, Eric Curtin (ecur...@redhat.com) wrote:
> >
> > > > > For the items listed above I think you can find different solutions
> > > > > which do not
On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 11:51, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>
> On Mo, 11.12.23 11:28, Eric Curtin (ecur...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> > > > For the items listed above I think you can find different solutions
> > > > which do not necessarily compromise security as much.
> > > >
> > > > So, in the list
On Mo, 11.12.23 11:42, Eric Curtin (ecur...@redhat.com) wrote:
> I am also thinking, what is the difference between "make the
> bootloader load the erofs into contiguous memory" part and doing
> something like storage-init.
Well, from my PoV there's value in reducing the stages of the boot
On Mo, 11.12.23 11:28, Eric Curtin (ecur...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > > For the items listed above I think you can find different solutions
> > > which do not necessarily compromise security as much.
> > >
> > > So, in the list above you could address the latter three like this:
> > >
> > > 2. Use
I am also thinking, what is the difference between "make the
bootloader load the erofs into contiguous memory" part and doing
something like storage-init.
They are similar approaches, introduce something in the middle to
handle the erofs.
Is mise le meas/Regards,
Eric Curtin
On Mon, 11 Dec
On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 11:20, Eric Curtin wrote:
>
> On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 10:06, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >
> > On Fr, 08.12.23 17:59, Eric Curtin (ecur...@redhat.com) wrote:
> >
> > > Here is the boot sequence with initoverlayfs integrated, the
> > > mini-initramfs contains just enough to
On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 10:06, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>
> On Fr, 08.12.23 17:59, Eric Curtin (ecur...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> > Here is the boot sequence with initoverlayfs integrated, the
> > mini-initramfs contains just enough to get storage drivers loaded and
> > storage devices initialized.
On Mo, 11.12.23 10:57, Lennart Poettering (mzerq...@0pointer.de) wrote:
> Which leaves item 1, which is a bit harder to address. We have been
> discussing this off an on internally too. A generic solution to this
> is hard. My current thinking for this could be something like this,
> covering the
On Fr, 08.12.23 17:59, Eric Curtin (ecur...@redhat.com) wrote:
> Here is the boot sequence with initoverlayfs integrated, the
> mini-initramfs contains just enough to get storage drivers loaded and
> storage devices initialized. storage-init is a process that is not
> designed to replace init, it
On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 18:12, Luca Boccassi wrote:
>
> On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 17:58, Eric Curtin wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 17:46, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 17:25, Eric Curtin wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 17:19, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > > >
On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 17:58, Eric Curtin wrote:
>
> On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 17:46, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 17:25, Eric Curtin wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 17:19, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 15:08, Eric Curtin wrote:
> > > > >
On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 17:46, Luca Boccassi wrote:
>
> On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 17:25, Eric Curtin wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 17:19, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 15:08, Eric Curtin wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 14:56, Andrei Borzenkov
> > > >
On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 17:25, Eric Curtin wrote:
>
> On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 17:19, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 15:08, Eric Curtin wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 14:56, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 09.12.2023 17:42, Eric Curtin wrote:
> > > > > On
On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 17:19, Luca Boccassi wrote:
>
> On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 15:08, Eric Curtin wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 14:56, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
> > >
> > > On 09.12.2023 17:42, Eric Curtin wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 12:46, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> On
On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 15:08, Eric Curtin wrote:
>
> On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 14:56, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
> >
> > On 09.12.2023 17:42, Eric Curtin wrote:
> > > On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 12:46, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 at 19:00, Eric Curtin wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> We have
On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 15:23, Daan De Meyer wrote:
>
> > We have been working on a new initial filesystem called initoverlayfs.
> > It is a new filesystem that provides a more scalable approach to
> > initial filesystems as opposed to just using initrds. We are writing
> > this RFC to the systemd
> We have been working on a new initial filesystem called initoverlayfs.
> It is a new filesystem that provides a more scalable approach to
> initial filesystems as opposed to just using initrds. We are writing
> this RFC to the systemd and dracut mailing lists (feel free to forward
> to UAPI
On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 14:56, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
>
> On 09.12.2023 17:42, Eric Curtin wrote:
> > On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 12:46, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 at 19:00, Eric Curtin wrote:
> >>>
> >>> We have been working on a new initial filesystem called initoverlayfs.
>
On 09.12.2023 17:42, Eric Curtin wrote:
On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 12:46, Luca Boccassi wrote:
On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 at 19:00, Eric Curtin wrote:
We have been working on a new initial filesystem called initoverlayfs.
It is a new filesystem that provides a more scalable approach to
initial
On Sat, 9 Dec 2023 at 12:46, Luca Boccassi wrote:
>
> On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 at 19:00, Eric Curtin wrote:
> >
> > We have been working on a new initial filesystem called initoverlayfs.
> > It is a new filesystem that provides a more scalable approach to
> > initial filesystems as opposed to just
On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 at 19:00, Eric Curtin wrote:
>
> We have been working on a new initial filesystem called initoverlayfs.
> It is a new filesystem that provides a more scalable approach to
> initial filesystems as opposed to just using initrds. We are writing
> this RFC to the systemd and dracut
46 matches
Mail list logo
