From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B77A3C47404 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 08:07:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8C8E720679 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 08:07:05 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 8C8E720679 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:41458 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iHO2q-0002y8-Oi for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Mon, 07 Oct 2019 04:07:04 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:45430) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iHO1x-0002S3-Rf for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Oct 2019 04:06:10 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iHO1w-0007d2-Pq for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Oct 2019 04:06:09 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:57310) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iHO1u-0007c8-Lj; Mon, 07 Oct 2019 04:06:06 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E24EA10C0929; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 08:06:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blackfin.pond.sub.org (unknown [10.36.118.123]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ADDFC5C219; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 08:06:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by blackfin.pond.sub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 31E3A1138648; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 10:05:55 +0200 (CEST) From: Markus Armbruster To: Maxim Levitsky Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 00/11] RFC crypto/luks: encryption key managment using amend interface References: <20190912223028.18496-1-mlevitsk@redhat.com> <632e3a8b-ee54-50e0-83a2-ea82ad8e061f@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2019 10:05:55 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Maxim Levitsky's message of "Sun, 22 Sep 2019 11:17:03 +0300") Message-ID: <871rvpj7z0.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.6.2 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.66]); Mon, 07 Oct 2019 08:06:05 +0000 (UTC) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 209.132.183.28 X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Kevin Wolf , =?utf-8?Q?Daniel_P=2E_Berrang=C3=A9?= , qemu-block@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Max Reitz , John Snow Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" Maxim Levitsky writes: > On Fri, 2019-09-20 at 17:14 -0400, John Snow wrote: >> >> On 9/12/19 6:30 PM, Maxim Levitsky wrote: >> > This patch series is continuation of my work to add encryption >> > key managment to luks/qcow2 with luks. >> > >> > This is second version of this patch set. >> > The changes are mostly addressing the review feedback, >> > plus I tested (and fixed sadly) the somewhat ugly code >> > that allows to still write share a raw luks device, >> > while preveting the key managment from happening in this case, >> > as it is unsafe. >> > I added a new iotest dedicated to that as well. >> > >> > Best regards, >> > Maxim Levitsky >> > >> >> What branch is this based on? >> It doesn't seem to apply to origin/master. >> >> --js > It is based on refactoring patch series I send before, > which is also under review: > "[PATCH v2 00/13] RFC crypto/luks: preparation for encryption key managment" Recommend to note such dependencies in the cover letter as Based-on: