From: Chandan Rajendra <chandan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH V2 05/11] ext4: Decrypt all boundary blocks when doing buffered write
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2018 15:27:18 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <11341004.sBrkMnv4Fk@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180221010155.GC252219@gmail.com>
On Wednesday, February 21, 2018 6:31:55 AM IST Eric Biggers wrote:
> Hi Chandan,
>
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 03:13:41PM +0530, Chandan Rajendra wrote:
> > With block size < page size, ext4_block_write_begin() can have up to two
> > blocks to decrypt. Hence this commit invokes fscrypt_decrypt_block() for
> > each of those blocks.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chandan Rajendra <chandan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > ---
> > fs/ext4/inode.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> > 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> > index 69a4fd6..180dd2d 100644
> > --- a/fs/ext4/inode.c
> > +++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c
> > @@ -1158,12 +1158,13 @@ static int ext4_block_write_begin(struct page *page, loff_t pos, unsigned len,
> > unsigned to = from + len;
> > struct inode *inode = page->mapping->host;
> > unsigned block_start, block_end;
> > - sector_t block;
> > + sector_t block, page_blk_nr;
> > int err = 0;
> > unsigned blocksize = inode->i_sb->s_blocksize;
> > unsigned bbits;
> > struct buffer_head *bh, *head, *wait[2], **wait_bh = wait;
> > bool decrypt = false;
> > + int i;
> >
> > BUG_ON(!PageLocked(page));
> > BUG_ON(from > PAGE_SIZE);
> > @@ -1224,18 +1225,30 @@ static int ext4_block_write_begin(struct page *page, loff_t pos, unsigned len,
> > /*
> > * If we issued read requests, let them complete.
> > */
> > - while (wait_bh > wait) {
> > - wait_on_buffer(*--wait_bh);
> > - if (!buffer_uptodate(*wait_bh))
> > + for (i = 0; &wait[i] < wait_bh; i++) {
> > + wait_on_buffer(wait[i]);
> > + if (!buffer_uptodate(wait[i]))
> > err = -EIO;
> > }
>
> [...]
>
> > + for (i = 0; &wait[i] < wait_bh; i++) {
> > + int err2;
> > +
> > + --wait_bh;
> > + block = page_blk_nr + (bh_offset(wait[i]) >> bbits);
> > + err2 = fscrypt_decrypt_block(page->mapping->host, page,
> > + wait[i]->b_size,
> > + bh_offset(wait[i]),
> > + block);
> > + if (err2) {
> > + clear_buffer_uptodate(wait[i]);
> > + err = err2;
> > + }
> > + }
>
> These are very confusing ways to iterate through an array, especially the second
> loop which is actually going in reverse order (why?). Why not just use a
> variable like 'nr_wait' for the number of valid buffer_head's like I had
> suggested? Then you can just do 'for (i = 0; i < nr_wait; i++)'.
>
Sorry, the "--wait_bh;" part was a remanent from the "RFC PATCH V1". Without
that statement, we loop in increasing order of elements in wait[] array. I
will use the 'nr_wait' counter approach and post the next version of the
patchset. I misunderstood your advice to mean that the code should use
similar looping order in both loops.
--
chandan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-21 9:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-12 9:43 [RFC PATCH V2 00/11] Ext4 encryption support for blocksize < pagesize Chandan Rajendra
2018-02-12 9:43 ` [RFC PATCH V2 01/11] ext4: Clear BH_Uptodate flag on decryption error Chandan Rajendra
2018-02-12 9:43 ` [RFC PATCH V2 02/11] fs/buffer.c: Export end_buffer_async_read and create_page_buffers Chandan Rajendra
2018-02-12 9:43 ` [RFC PATCH V2 03/11] fs/crypto/: Rename functions to indicate that they operate on FS blocks Chandan Rajendra
2018-02-12 9:43 ` [RFC PATCH V2 04/11] completion_pages: Decrypt all contiguous blocks in a page Chandan Rajendra
2018-02-12 9:43 ` [RFC PATCH V2 05/11] ext4: Decrypt all boundary blocks when doing buffered write Chandan Rajendra
2018-02-21 1:01 ` Eric Biggers
2018-02-21 9:57 ` Chandan Rajendra [this message]
2018-02-12 9:43 ` [RFC PATCH V2 06/11] ext4: Decrypt the block that needs to be partially zeroed Chandan Rajendra
2018-02-12 9:43 ` [RFC PATCH V2 07/11] fscrypt_zeroout_range: Encrypt all zeroed out blocks of a page Chandan Rajendra
2018-02-21 1:16 ` Eric Biggers
2018-02-21 9:57 ` Chandan Rajendra
2018-03-26 6:05 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2018-03-26 8:22 ` Chandan Rajendra
2018-03-27 19:40 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2018-03-28 13:36 ` Chandan Rajendra
2018-04-05 7:03 ` Chandan Rajendra
2018-04-05 12:47 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2018-04-05 13:07 ` Chandan Rajendra
2018-04-05 20:50 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2018-02-12 9:43 ` [RFC PATCH V2 08/11] Enable reading encrypted files in blocksize less than pagesize setup Chandan Rajendra
2018-02-12 9:43 ` [RFC PATCH V2 09/11] fscrypt: Move completion_pages to crypto/readpage.c Chandan Rajendra
2018-02-12 9:43 ` [RFC PATCH V2 10/11] Enable writing encrypted files in blocksize less than pagesize setup Chandan Rajendra
2018-02-21 0:54 ` Eric Biggers
2018-02-21 9:57 ` Chandan Rajendra
2018-02-21 18:53 ` Eric Biggers
2018-02-12 9:43 ` [RFC PATCH V2 11/11] ext4: Enable encryption for blocksize less than page size Chandan Rajendra
2018-02-21 0:48 ` [RFC PATCH V2 00/11] Ext4 encryption support for blocksize < pagesize Eric Biggers
2018-02-21 9:57 ` Chandan Rajendra
2018-02-21 19:06 ` Eric Biggers
2018-02-22 8:50 ` Chandan Rajendra
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=11341004.sBrkMnv4Fk@localhost.localdomain \
--to=chandan@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=ebiggers3@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).