Re: [PATCH v4 0/7] add support for direct I/O with fscrypt using blk-crypto

From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
To: Satya Tangirala <satyat@google.com>
Cc: linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/7] add support for direct I/O with fscrypt using blk-crypto
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2020 17:56:02 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200721005602.GE7464@sol.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200720233739.824943-1-satyat@google.com>

On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 11:37:32PM +0000, Satya Tangirala wrote:
> This patch series adds support for direct I/O with fscrypt using
> blk-crypto. It has been rebased on fscrypt/master.
> 
> Patch 1 adds two functions to fscrypt that need to be called to determine
> if direct I/O is supported for a request.
> 
> Patches 2 and 3 wire up direct-io and iomap respectively with the functions
> introduced in Patch 1 and set bio crypt contexts on bios when appropriate
> by calling into fscrypt.
> 
> Patches 4 and 5 allow ext4 and f2fs direct I/O to support fscrypt without
> falling back to buffered I/O.
> 
> Patches 6 and 7 update the fscrypt documentation for inline encryption
> support and direct I/O. The documentation now notes the required conditions
> for inline encryption and direct I/O on encrypted files.
> 
> This patch series was tested by running xfstests with test_dummy_encryption
> with and without the 'inlinecrypt' mount option, and there were no
> meaningful regressions. One regression was for generic/587 on ext4,
> but that test isn't compatible with test_dummy_encryption in the first
> place, and the test "incorrectly" passes without the 'inlinecrypt' mount
> option - a patch will be sent out to exclude that test when
> test_dummy_encryption is turned on with ext4 (like the other quota related
> tests that use user visible quota files). The other regression was for
> generic/252 on ext4, which does direct I/O with a buffer aligned to the
> block device's blocksize, but not necessarily aligned to the filesystem's
> block size, which direct I/O with fscrypt requires.
> 

This patch series looks good to me now.  Can the ext4, f2fs, and iomap
maintainers take a look?

- Eric