All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
To: Chandan Rajendra <chandan@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: tytso@mit.edu, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, adilger.kernel@dilger.ca,
	jaegeuk@kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [RFC PATCH 00/10] Consolidate Post read processing code
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 13:17:16 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190219211715.GA12177@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190218100433.20048-1-chandan@linux.ibm.com>

Hi Chandan,

On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 03:34:23PM +0530, Chandan Rajendra wrote:
> This patchset moves the "post read processing" code into a file of its
> own and gets the generic do_mpage_readpge() to make use of the
> functionality provided. With these changes in place, the patchset
> changes Ext4 to use mpage_readpage[s] instead of its own custom
> ext4_readpages() function. This is done to reduce duplicity of code
> across filesystems. Based on the reviews provided for this patchset, I
> will change F2FS to use mpage_readpage[s] and post the next version of
> this patchset to linux-fsdevel mailing list.
> 
> The patchset also includes patches from previous postings i.e.
> patches to replace per-filesystem encryption config options with a
> single config option that affects all filesystems making use of
> fscrypt code.
> 
> Chandan Rajendra (10):
>   ext4: use IS_ENCRYPTED() to check encryption status
>   f2fs: use IS_ENCRYPTED() to check encryption status
>   fscrypt: remove filesystem specific build config option
>   Consolidate "post read processing" into a new file
>   fsverity: Add call back to decide if verity check has to be performed
>   Introduce REQ_POST_READ_PROC bio flag
>   fsverity: Add call back to determine readpage limit
>   fsverity: Add call back to verify file holes
>   fs/mpage.c: Integrate post read processing
>   ext4: Wire up ext4_readpage[s] to use mpage_readpage[s]
> 

Thanks for working on this!  This will also make it much easier to support
block_size != PAGE_SIZE in ext4 encryption, right?  I think this is the best
path forward, but I'll take a closer look at your new patches.

FYI regarding practical matters, merging fs-verity was delayed due to
disagreement about the API.  See https://lwn.net/Articles/775872/.

We don't have to wait for fs-verity for your initial fscrypt changes, though:

	ext4: use IS_ENCRYPTED() to check encryption status
	f2fs: use IS_ENCRYPTED() to check encryption status
	fscrypt: remove filesystem specific build config option

So, a couple weeks ago Ted and I already queued those three patches in
fscrypt.git (https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tytso/fscrypt.git
branch "master", though we plan to change the repo soon) for the upcoming merge
window, based on upstream rather than fs-verity.  Are you fine with that?

I also suggest adding linux-fsdevel to the Cc given the fs/*.c changes.

Thanks!

- Eric


_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
To: Chandan Rajendra <chandan@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu,
	adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, jaegeuk@kernel.org, yuchao0@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/10] Consolidate Post read processing code
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 13:17:16 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190219211715.GA12177@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190218100433.20048-1-chandan@linux.ibm.com>

Hi Chandan,

On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 03:34:23PM +0530, Chandan Rajendra wrote:
> This patchset moves the "post read processing" code into a file of its
> own and gets the generic do_mpage_readpge() to make use of the
> functionality provided. With these changes in place, the patchset
> changes Ext4 to use mpage_readpage[s] instead of its own custom
> ext4_readpages() function. This is done to reduce duplicity of code
> across filesystems. Based on the reviews provided for this patchset, I
> will change F2FS to use mpage_readpage[s] and post the next version of
> this patchset to linux-fsdevel mailing list.
> 
> The patchset also includes patches from previous postings i.e.
> patches to replace per-filesystem encryption config options with a
> single config option that affects all filesystems making use of
> fscrypt code.
> 
> Chandan Rajendra (10):
>   ext4: use IS_ENCRYPTED() to check encryption status
>   f2fs: use IS_ENCRYPTED() to check encryption status
>   fscrypt: remove filesystem specific build config option
>   Consolidate "post read processing" into a new file
>   fsverity: Add call back to decide if verity check has to be performed
>   Introduce REQ_POST_READ_PROC bio flag
>   fsverity: Add call back to determine readpage limit
>   fsverity: Add call back to verify file holes
>   fs/mpage.c: Integrate post read processing
>   ext4: Wire up ext4_readpage[s] to use mpage_readpage[s]
> 

Thanks for working on this!  This will also make it much easier to support
block_size != PAGE_SIZE in ext4 encryption, right?  I think this is the best
path forward, but I'll take a closer look at your new patches.

FYI regarding practical matters, merging fs-verity was delayed due to
disagreement about the API.  See https://lwn.net/Articles/775872/.

We don't have to wait for fs-verity for your initial fscrypt changes, though:

	ext4: use IS_ENCRYPTED() to check encryption status
	f2fs: use IS_ENCRYPTED() to check encryption status
	fscrypt: remove filesystem specific build config option

So, a couple weeks ago Ted and I already queued those three patches in
fscrypt.git (https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tytso/fscrypt.git
branch "master", though we plan to change the repo soon) for the upcoming merge
window, based on upstream rather than fs-verity.  Are you fine with that?

I also suggest adding linux-fsdevel to the Cc given the fs/*.c changes.

Thanks!

- Eric

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
To: Chandan Rajendra <chandan@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: tytso@mit.edu, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, adilger.kernel@dilger.ca,
	jaegeuk@kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/10] Consolidate Post read processing code
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 13:17:16 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190219211715.GA12177@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190218100433.20048-1-chandan@linux.ibm.com>

Hi Chandan,

On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 03:34:23PM +0530, Chandan Rajendra wrote:
> This patchset moves the "post read processing" code into a file of its
> own and gets the generic do_mpage_readpge() to make use of the
> functionality provided. With these changes in place, the patchset
> changes Ext4 to use mpage_readpage[s] instead of its own custom
> ext4_readpages() function. This is done to reduce duplicity of code
> across filesystems. Based on the reviews provided for this patchset, I
> will change F2FS to use mpage_readpage[s] and post the next version of
> this patchset to linux-fsdevel mailing list.
> 
> The patchset also includes patches from previous postings i.e.
> patches to replace per-filesystem encryption config options with a
> single config option that affects all filesystems making use of
> fscrypt code.
> 
> Chandan Rajendra (10):
>   ext4: use IS_ENCRYPTED() to check encryption status
>   f2fs: use IS_ENCRYPTED() to check encryption status
>   fscrypt: remove filesystem specific build config option
>   Consolidate "post read processing" into a new file
>   fsverity: Add call back to decide if verity check has to be performed
>   Introduce REQ_POST_READ_PROC bio flag
>   fsverity: Add call back to determine readpage limit
>   fsverity: Add call back to verify file holes
>   fs/mpage.c: Integrate post read processing
>   ext4: Wire up ext4_readpage[s] to use mpage_readpage[s]
> 

Thanks for working on this!  This will also make it much easier to support
block_size != PAGE_SIZE in ext4 encryption, right?  I think this is the best
path forward, but I'll take a closer look at your new patches.

FYI regarding practical matters, merging fs-verity was delayed due to
disagreement about the API.  See https://lwn.net/Articles/775872/.

We don't have to wait for fs-verity for your initial fscrypt changes, though:

	ext4: use IS_ENCRYPTED() to check encryption status
	f2fs: use IS_ENCRYPTED() to check encryption status
	fscrypt: remove filesystem specific build config option

So, a couple weeks ago Ted and I already queued those three patches in
fscrypt.git (https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tytso/fscrypt.git
branch "master", though we plan to change the repo soon) for the upcoming merge
window, based on upstream rather than fs-verity.  Are you fine with that?

I also suggest adding linux-fsdevel to the Cc given the fs/*.c changes.

Thanks!

- Eric

  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-02-19 21:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-02-18 10:04 [RFC PATCH 00/10] Consolidate Post read processing code Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04 ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04 ` [f2fs-dev] [RFC PATCH 01/10] ext4: use IS_ENCRYPTED() to check encryption status Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04   ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04   ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04 ` [RFC PATCH 02/10] f2fs: " Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04   ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04 ` [RFC PATCH 03/10] fscrypt: remove filesystem specific build config option Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04   ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04 ` [RFC PATCH 04/10] Consolidate "post read processing" into a new file Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04   ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-19 23:22   ` [f2fs-dev] " Eric Biggers
2019-02-19 23:22     ` Eric Biggers
2019-02-19 23:22     ` Eric Biggers
2019-02-21 12:51     ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-21 12:51       ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04 ` [f2fs-dev] [RFC PATCH 05/10] fsverity: Add call back to decide if verity check has to be performed Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04   ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04   ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-19 23:26   ` [f2fs-dev] " Eric Biggers
2019-02-19 23:26     ` Eric Biggers
2019-02-21 12:54     ` [f2fs-dev] " Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-21 12:54       ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04 ` [f2fs-dev] [RFC PATCH 06/10] Introduce REQ_POST_READ_PROC bio flag Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04   ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04   ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-20  0:21   ` [f2fs-dev] " Eric Biggers
2019-02-20  0:21     ` Eric Biggers
2019-02-21 13:03     ` [f2fs-dev] " Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-21 13:03       ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04 ` [RFC PATCH 07/10] fsverity: Add call back to determine readpage limit Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04   ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04 ` [RFC PATCH 08/10] fsverity: Add call back to verify file holes Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04   ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-20  0:35   ` Eric Biggers
2019-02-20  0:35     ` Eric Biggers
2019-02-21 13:05     ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-21 13:05       ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04 ` [RFC PATCH 09/10] fs/mpage.c: Integrate post read processing Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04   ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04 ` [RFC PATCH 10/10] ext4: Wire up ext4_readpage[s] to use mpage_readpage[s] Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:04   ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:19 ` [RFC PATCH 00/10] Consolidate Post read processing code Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-18 10:19   ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-19 21:17 ` Eric Biggers [this message]
2019-02-19 21:17   ` Eric Biggers
2019-02-19 21:17   ` Eric Biggers
2019-02-21 13:29   ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-21 13:29     ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-20  0:41 ` Eric Biggers
2019-02-20  0:41   ` Eric Biggers
2019-02-21 13:32   ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-21 13:32     ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-21 18:38     ` Eric Biggers
2019-02-21 18:38       ` Eric Biggers
2019-02-22  4:29       ` Chandan Rajendra
2019-02-22  4:29         ` 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=20190219211715.GA12177@gmail.com \
    --to=ebiggers@kernel.org \
    --cc=adilger.kernel@dilger.ca \
    --cc=chandan@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=linux-fscrypt@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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.