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=-5.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham 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 F0729C3A589 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 05:13:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.sourceforge.net (lists.sourceforge.net [216.105.38.7]) (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 BBB262087E; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 05:13:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sourceforge.net header.i=@sourceforge.net header.b="kJWxA8a5"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sf.net header.i=@sf.net header.b="T/MXJ36H" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org BBB262087E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=sfs-ml-2.v29.lw.sourceforge.com) by sfs-ml-2.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1hzwSg-0003rj-GT; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 05:13:38 +0000 Received: from [172.30.20.202] (helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1hzwSf-0003rY-AU for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 05:13:37 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceforge.net; s=x; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:CC:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=UXlC6+DG13IOlVWaSThwgREZIBM71FMQSPutHMCpLxE=; b=kJWxA8a5cS54uYQR/BHpWjfzNr 7wIwUgMvlgwbS1wQmyK63IK7f7ZVkH3NrnWIPRKLaQWaKrWT8SzZu30kKjmKBFKmzWQYs5jS00MwS QweEE+2FxmZeeo1492/O7ZZfohF08glu1tpxokt1rbPFnRj8wlkPNqY3yhAfAwMc/ECE=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sf.net; s=x ; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:CC:To :From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=UXlC6+DG13IOlVWaSThwgREZIBM71FMQSPutHMCpLxE=; b=T/MXJ36Hh42PqeG1ga+iPwQZPN 3lAnIT32XvXRCLBiOX7y6DW95ALpJaC+0NbGiaX7YtQuPdwJtD1Vvy9yfhpGW40c3Kzzq9jQjOTMZ 2ob6AaJKwDEJ5jKVJzcQY0SQU1KwV9T3fBBKTq4VYXk4i3qULRxtvQxUBtuJpWAmU2oM=; Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.189] helo=huawei.com) by sfi-mx-3.v28.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) id 1hzwSc-009V9C-Ni for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 05:13:37 +0000 Received: from DGGEMM402-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.54]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 30C0D55AD62F7D7E5F5A; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 13:13:16 +0800 (CST) Received: from dggeme762-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.108) by DGGEMM402-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.20.210) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 13:13:15 +0800 Received: from architecture4 (10.140.130.215) by dggeme762-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.108) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1591.10; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 13:13:15 +0800 Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 13:12:36 +0800 From: Gao Xiang To: Chandan Rajendra Message-ID: <20190820051236.GE159846@architecture4> References: <20190816061804.14840-1-chandan@linux.ibm.com> <20190816061804.14840-6-chandan@linux.ibm.com> <1652707.8YmLLlegLt@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1652707.8YmLLlegLt@localhost.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-Originating-IP: [10.140.130.215] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggeme715-chm.china.huawei.com (10.1.199.111) To dggeme762-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.108) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Headers-End: 1hzwSc-009V9C-Ni Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH V4 5/8] f2fs: Use read_callbacks for decrypting file data X-BeenThere: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: hch@infradead.org, tytso@mit.edu, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, ebiggers@kernel.org, linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, chandanrmail@gmail.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, jaegeuk@kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Hi Chandan, On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 10:35:29AM +0530, Chandan Rajendra wrote: > On Friday, August 16, 2019 11:48 AM Chandan Rajendra wrote: > > F2FS has a copy of "post read processing" code using which encrypted > > file data is decrypted. This commit replaces it to make use of the > > generic read_callbacks facility. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chandan Rajendra > > Hi Eric and Ted, > > Looks like F2FS requires a lot more flexiblity than what can be offered by > read callbacks i.e. > > 1. F2FS wants to make use of its own workqueue for decryption, verity and > decompression. > 2. F2FS' decompression code is not an FS independent entity like fscrypt and > fsverity. Hence they would need Filesystem specific callback functions to > be invoked from "read callbacks". > > Hence I would suggest that we should drop F2FS changes made in this > patchset. Please let me know your thoughts on this. Add a word, I have some little concern about post read procession order a bit as I mentioned before, because I'd like to move common EROFS decompression code out in the future as well for other fses to use after we think it's mature enough. It seems the current code mainly addresses eliminating duplicated code, therefore I have no idea about that... Thanks, Gao Xiang > > -- > chandan > > > _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel