Re: [PATCH 0/4] dm verity: add support for error correction

[Sami Tolvanen]

On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 11:37:35AM -0500, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> I'm left wondering: can the new error correction code be made an
> optional feature that is off by default? -- so as to preserve some
> isolation of this new code from the old dm-verity behaviour.

It's optional in the sense that you must specify error correction
parameters in the table to turn it on. Otherwise, verity_dec_decode
returns -1 and dm-verity handles errors as before.

> might be good to add a wrapper like verity_fec_is_enabled().

Sure. I can do this in v2 and address the other feedback and build
issues as well.

> Also, the 2 other big questions from Mikulas need answering:
> 1) why aren't you actually adjustng error codes, returning success, if
>    dm-verity was able to trap/correct the corruption?

We don't see actual I/O errors very often. Most corruption we've seen
is caused by flaky hardware that doesn't return errors. However, I can
certainly change to code to attempt recovery in this case too.

> 2) please fix the code to preallocate all required memory -- so that
>    verity_fec_alloc_buffers() isn't called in map.

I tried to avoid preallocating the buffers because they are relatively
large (up to 1 MiB depending on the Reed-Solomon parameters) and not
required unless we have errors to correct. I suppose there's no way to
safely do this in the middle of I/O?

> If this error correction feature is going to go upstream we really
> should see any associated userspace enablement also included in
> veritysetup.

I can look into this.

Sami
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/