Re: [PATCH v7 6/9] scsi: ufs: Add inline encryption support to UFS

From: Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@mediatek.com>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Satya Tangirala <satyat@google.com>,
	<linux-block@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	<linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
	Barani Muthukumaran <bmuthuku@qti.qualcomm.com>,
	Kuohong Wang <kuohong.wang@mediatek.com>,
	"Kim Boojin" <boojin.kim@samsung.com>,
	Ladvine D Almeida <Ladvine.DAlmeida@synopsys.com>,
	Parshuram Raju Thombare <pthombar@cadence.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 6/9] scsi: ufs: Add inline encryption support to UFS
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2020 21:47:36 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1582465656.26304.69.camel@mtksdccf07> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200221181109.GB925@sol.localdomain>

Hi, 

On Fri, 2020-02-21 at 10:11 -0800, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 09:22:44AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 03:50:47AM -0800, Satya Tangirala wrote:
> > > Wire up ufshcd.c with the UFS Crypto API, the block layer inline
> > > encryption additions and the keyslot manager.
> > > 
> > > Also, introduce UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_CRYPTO that certain UFS drivers
> > > that don't yet support inline encryption need to use - taken from
> > > patches by John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
> > > (https://android-review.googlesource.com/c/kernel/common/+/1162224/5)
> > > (https://android-review.googlesource.com/c/kernel/common/+/1162225/5)
> > > (https://android-review.googlesource.com/c/kernel/common/+/1164506/1)
> > 
> > Between all these quirks, with what upstream SOC does this feature
> > actually work?
> 
> It will work on DragonBoard 845c, i.e. Qualcomm's Snapdragon 845 SoC, if we
> apply my patchset
> https://lkml.kernel.org/linux-block/20200110061634.46742-1-ebiggers@kernel.org/.
> It's currently based on Satya's v6 patchset, but I'll be rebasing it onto v7 and
> resending.  It uses all the UFS standard crypto code that Satya is adding except
> for ufshcd_program_key(), which has to be replaced with a vendor-specific
> operation.  It does also add vendor-specific code to ufs-qcom to initialize the
> crypto hardware, but that's in addition to the standard code, not replacing it.
> 
> DragonBoard 845c is a commercially available development board that boots the
> mainline kernel (modulo two arm-smmu IOMMU patches that Linaro is working on),
> so I think it counts as an "upstream SoC".
> 
> That's all that we currently have the hardware to verify ourselves, though
> Mediatek says that Satya's patches are working on their hardware too.  And the
> UFS controller on Mediatek SoCs is supported by the upstream kernel via
> ufs-mediatek.  But I don't know whether it just works exactly as-is or whether
> they needed to patch ufs-mediatek too.  Stanley or Kuohong, can you confirm?

Yes, MediaTek is keeping work closely with inline encryption patch sets.
Currently the v6 version can work well (without
UFSHCD_QUIRK_BROKEN_CRYPTO quirk) at least in our MT6779 SoC platform
which basic SoC support and some other peripheral drivers are under
upstreaming as below link,

https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-mediatek/list/?state=%
2A&q=6779&series=&submitter=&delegate=&archive=both

The integration with inline encryption patch set needs to patch
ufs-mediatek and patches are ready in downstream. We plan to upstream
them soon after inline encryption patch sets get merged.

> 
> We're also hoping that the patches are usable with the UFS controllers from
> Cadence Design Systems and Synopsys, which have upstream kernel support in
> drivers/scsi/ufs/cdns-pltfrm.c and drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd-dwc.c.  But we don't
> currently have a way to verify this.  But in 2018, both companies had tried to
> get the UFS v2.1 standard crypto support upstream, so presumably they must have
> implemented it in their hardware.  +Cc the people who were working on that.
> 
> - Eric

Thanks,
Stanley Chu