From: "Luís Henriques" <lhenriques@suse.de>
To: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com>
Cc: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
"Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>,
Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>,
linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] fscrypt: new helper function - fscrypt_prepare_atomic_open()
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2023 09:25:01 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <878rfzvg5u.fsf@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46e90e39-1f7d-7260-acfc-e7ffd9aa88bd@redhat.com> (Xiubo Li's message of "Tue, 14 Mar 2023 12:20:23 +0800")
Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> writes:
> On 14/03/2023 10:25, Eric Biggers wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 08:53:51AM +0800, Xiubo Li wrote:
>>> On 14/03/2023 02:09, Eric Biggers wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 12:33:09PM +0000, Luís Henriques wrote:
>>>>> + * The regular open path will use fscrypt_file_open for that, but in the
>>>>> + * atomic open a different approach is required.
>>>> This should actually be fscrypt_prepare_lookup, not fscrypt_file_open, right?
>>>>
>>>>> +int fscrypt_prepare_atomic_open(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + int err;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (!IS_ENCRYPTED(dir))
>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + err = fscrypt_get_encryption_info(dir, true);
>>>>> + if (!err && !fscrypt_has_encryption_key(dir)) {
>>>>> + spin_lock(&dentry->d_lock);
>>>>> + dentry->d_flags |= DCACHE_NOKEY_NAME;
>>>>> + spin_unlock(&dentry->d_lock);
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +
>>>>> + return err;
>>>>> +}
>>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(fscrypt_prepare_atomic_open);
>>>> [...]
>>>>> +static inline int fscrypt_prepare_atomic_open(struct inode *dir,
>>>>> + struct dentry *dentry)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>>>>> +}
>>>> This has different behavior on unencrypted directories depending on whether
>>>> CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION is enabled or not. That's bad.
>>>>
>>>> In patch 2, the caller you are introducing has already checked IS_ENCRYPTED().
>>>>
>>>> Also, your kerneldoc comment for fscrypt_prepare_atomic_open() says it is for
>>>> *encrypted* directories.
>>>>
>>>> So IMO, just remove the IS_ENCRYPTED() check from the CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION
>>>> version of fscrypt_prepare_atomic_open().
>>> IMO we should keep this check in fscrypt_prepare_atomic_open() to make it
>>> consistent with the existing fscrypt_prepare_open(). And we can just remove
>>> the check from ceph instead.
>>>
>> Well, then the !CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION version would need to return 0 if
>> IS_ENCRYPTED() too.
>
> For the !CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION version I think you mean:
>
> static inline int fscrypt_prepare_atomic_open(struct inode *dir, struct dentry
> *dentry)
>
> {
> if (IS_ENCRYPTED(dir))
> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> return 0;
> }
>
>
>> Either way would be okay, but please don't do a mix of both approaches within a
>> single function, as this patch currently does.
>>
>> Note that there are other fscrypt_* functions, such as fscrypt_get_symlink(),
>> that require an IS_ENCRYPTED() inode, so that pattern is not new.
>
> Yeah, correct, I didn't notice that.
OK, thank you both for the feedback. I'll send out v2 in a few hours.
But my preference will be to drop the IS_ENCRYPTED() from
fscrypt_prepare_atomic_open(). The reason is that we still need to keep
it in the caller function anyway, because we need to set the MDS flags
accordingly (see patch 2):
if (IS_ENCRYPTED(dir)) {
set_bit(CEPH_MDS_R_FSCRYPT_FILE, &req->r_req_flags);
err = fscrypt_prepare_atomic_open(dir, dentry);
if (err)
goto out_req;
}
Cheers,
--
Luís
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-14 9:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-13 12:33 [PATCH 0/2] ceph: fscrypt: fix atomic open bug for encrypted directories Luís Henriques
2023-03-13 12:33 ` [PATCH 1/2] fscrypt: new helper function - fscrypt_prepare_atomic_open() Luís Henriques
2023-03-13 18:09 ` Eric Biggers
2023-03-14 0:53 ` Xiubo Li
2023-03-14 2:25 ` Eric Biggers
2023-03-14 4:20 ` Xiubo Li
2023-03-14 9:25 ` Luís Henriques [this message]
2023-03-14 10:15 ` Luís Henriques
2023-03-14 17:56 ` Eric Biggers
2023-03-15 11:08 ` Luís Henriques
2023-03-15 17:12 ` Eric Biggers
2023-03-15 17:59 ` Luís Henriques
2023-03-13 12:33 ` [PATCH 2/2] ceph: switch atomic open to use new fscrypt helper Luís Henriques
2023-03-13 18:11 ` Eric Biggers
2023-03-13 18:42 ` Luís Henriques
2023-03-14 0:38 ` Xiubo Li
2023-03-14 9:27 ` Luís Henriques
2023-03-13 17:11 ` [PATCH 0/2] ceph: fscrypt: fix atomic open bug for encrypted directories Jeff Layton
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=878rfzvg5u.fsf@suse.de \
--to=lhenriques@suse.de \
--cc=ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ebiggers@kernel.org \
--cc=idryomov@gmail.com \
--cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=xiubli@redhat.com \
/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).