lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jan]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: udf: Prevent write-unsupported filesystem to be remounted read-write
On Tue 15-01-19 09:48:32, Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 January 2019 09:41:19 Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Tue 15-01-19 09:31:11, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > > On Monday 14 January 2019 19:07:35 Michael Sabolish wrote:
> > > > I can try and make a pull-request for udftune, and I can just copy the API for tune2fs. It would work something like:
> > > >
> > > > udftune -O read-only device (to set read-only access type)
> > > >
> > > > or:
> > > >
> > > > udftune -O ^read-only device (to clear read-only access type (aka set rw))
> > >
> > > This API is ambiguous. What does it mean for ^read-only? In UDF you have
> > > following access types: overwritable, rewritable, writeonce, readonly,
> > > pseudo-overwritable, unknown.
> > >
> > > So you would need to know to which R/W access type to switch
> > > (overwritable, rewritable, writeonce or pseudo-overwritable).
> > >
> > > With information of media type, you could be able to guess correct
> > > access type. But for UDF images stored in VFS there is no media
> > > information. Also you can have uncommon setup, e.g. usage of CD-R
> > > writeonce setup on CD-R/W disc. So "autodetection" of media type would
> > > not work always correctly.
> > >
> > > So I think that it would be better to have following API:
> > >
> > > udftune --access-type=<new_access_type>
> > >
> > > or
> > >
> > > udftune --change-access-type=<new_access_type>
> > >
> > > I understand that you would like to have similar API as tune2fs, but UDF
> > > settings are too different from ext*.
> >
> > If you wanted to follow tune2fs interface, you can have e.g.:
>
> Question is if it is a good idea to follow this interface.

Agreed. I'll leave that decision up to you as a maintainer :)

> > udftune -E access-type=<foo>
> >
> > Another question about the feature is - the access type is actually per
> > partition and there can be multiple partitions on UDF media. So I think we
> > need to specify the partition number in the command and <foo> has to
> > actually be something like <partition number>,<access_type>.
>
> Access type is stored in partition descriptor and in UDF (as opposite of
> ECMA-167) you can have only one partition descriptor. IIRC there is some
> exception when you have two partition descriptors, but then one have to be
> readonly and second virtual.

Ah, right, I forgot that UDF standard limits how partitions can be set up.
However I don't see anything that would limit number of "type 1" maps? I've
only found in 2.2.4.7 that "Partition Maps shall be limited to Partition
Map type 1, except type 2 maps ...". In which I'm not sure whether this is
meant to imply there is only one 'type 1' partition map or whether there
can be more of them.

Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-01-15 10:46    [W:0.054 / U:4.920 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site