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=-6.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,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 EAADDC43460 for ; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 01:19:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB7CC610F9 for ; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 01:19:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229942AbhDHBUH (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Apr 2021 21:20:07 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:49122 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229505AbhDHBUG (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Apr 2021 21:20:06 -0400 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5D16D60FDA; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 01:19:56 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1617844796; bh=NMLFTBcNvVJDkTcx9oLGjPRmtBoThl8bXOibeYic2F8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=qkghelidwR6S6LVyReHiIdcYXCVsLBGXl/HiTXXOeKUVaKCtsIolh7d/eszttB/IR 1wLF2ioNdu+YZzjbrpggFbbLrq2z+WM+ZXOrt9OJI1Qfk2EXS8ijKHZvhjcUJQyEYs HGbuvVz7WqM/rZ0txKkbOl2wmkS1grm8UmX/Hu2j6G0+hHaS7ujH2D5zpPKo9cLA5l ReUitlPcXRQ8eYTZ6Ot7F+rmN1qzvU0ekNRilHQ+BEcY+8x2VonVaVuZApsWL+syq6 ab7MMGMfzhY0wv+2DQtINrWIcPspx0RgKAAEEbUxEW8LwPnfZ6t6pljYv0s9+lmSRO MiMkQHOCWqR7g== Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2021 18:19:54 -0700 From: Eric Biggers To: Jeff Layton Cc: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5 03/19] fscrypt: export fscrypt_fname_encrypt and fscrypt_fname_encrypted_size Message-ID: References: <20210326173227.96363-1-jlayton@kernel.org> <20210326173227.96363-4-jlayton@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210326173227.96363-4-jlayton@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 01:32:11PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > For ceph, we want to use our own scheme for handling filenames that are > are longer than NAME_MAX after encryption and base64 encoding. This > allows us to have a consistent view of the encrypted filenames for > clients that don't support fscrypt and clients that do but that don't > have the key. > > Export fscrypt_fname_encrypt. Rename fscrypt_fname_encrypted_size to > __fscrypt_fname_encrypted_size and add a new wrapper called > fscrypt_fname_encrypted_size that takes an inode argument rahter than > a pointer to a fscrypt_policy union. This explanation seems to be missing a logical connection between the first and second paragraphs. I think it's missing something along the lines of: "Currently, fs/crypto/ only supports filenames encryption using fscrypt_setup_filename(), which also handles decoding no-key names. Ceph can't use that because it needs to handle no-key names in a different way. So, we need to export the functions needed to encrypt filenames separately." (I might have gotten the explanation a bit wrong... Point is, it's the type of thing that seems to be missing here.) - Eric