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=0.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FSL_HELO_FAKE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 18D7DC5DF65 for ; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 21:54:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD7F3214D8 for ; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 21:54:43 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1573077283; bh=fUCudD0u+rUPznt6psLLKnhgZDFsnN491c3ffkkkwSA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=k4PS8qZnnqK5GSsnh/uZx+nBg9Xbhir82LadRHlz+XsZlg1jRi95Gk5JCUN+T9sda EyrYme9JzfFv1ZN1JZFc7RukcA7cvvs/bMevFi7/CTzL87jrAGBCrD9JSb1d4TSVak sDgOz1Cih23z0UE3cb9Pg1GvttDIU4DUjDKVxO5k= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727023AbfKFVyn (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Nov 2019 16:54:43 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:32802 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726798AbfKFVym (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Nov 2019 16:54:42 -0500 Received: from gmail.com (unknown [104.132.1.77]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B15DA214D8; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 21:54:41 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1573077281; bh=fUCudD0u+rUPznt6psLLKnhgZDFsnN491c3ffkkkwSA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=DVKseDICYx9UatqSZge77748ds/ZqO04Ug8peIzLpJPlOEx5eSJASZr1xF4z2LQP7 h6CyoNdkDY5wPyrzxlB9dhg98cpJuTe1831w10C7Nox3r9b7vP1LH/4qY5R2eRRgE2 UiokSBq33dzu59DVizD0OtkBEQ+D0UXetA8p3h4Y= Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2019 13:54:40 -0800 From: Eric Biggers To: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Theodore Ts'o Cc: linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Chandan Rajendra Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] ext4: support encryption with blocksize != PAGE_SIZE Message-ID: <20191106215439.GC139580@gmail.com> Mail-Followup-To: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Theodore Ts'o , linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Chandan Rajendra References: <20191023033312.361355-1-ebiggers@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191023033312.361355-1-ebiggers@kernel.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-fscrypt-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 08:33:10PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote: > Hello, > > This patchset makes ext4 support encryption on filesystems where the > filesystem block size is not equal to PAGE_SIZE. This allows e.g. > PowerPC systems to use ext4 encryption. > > Most of the work for this was already done in prior kernel releases; now > the only part missing is decryption support in block_read_full_page(). > Chandan Rajendra has proposed a patchset "Consolidate FS read I/O > callbacks code" [1] to address this and do various other things like > make ext4 use mpage_readpages() again, and make ext4 and f2fs share more > code. But it doesn't seem to be going anywhere. > > Therefore, I propose we simply add decryption support to > block_read_full_page() for now. This is a fairly small change, and it > gets ext4 encryption with subpage-sized blocks working. > > Note: to keep things simple I'm just allocating the work object from the > bi_end_io function with GFP_ATOMIC. But if people think it's necessary, > it could be changed to use preallocation like the page-based read path. > > Tested with 'gce-xfstests -c ext4/encrypt_1k -g auto', using the new > "encrypt_1k" config I created. All tests pass except for those that > already fail or are excluded with the encrypt or 1k configs, and 2 tests > that try to create 1023-byte symlinks which fails since encrypted > symlinks are limited to blocksize-3 bytes. Also ran the dedicated > encryption tests using 'kvm-xfstests -c ext4/1k -g encrypt'; all pass, > including the on-disk ciphertext verification tests. > > [1] https://lkml.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20190910155115.28550-1-chandan@linux.ibm.com/T/#u > > Changed v1 => v2: > - Added check for S_ISREG() which technically should be there, though > it happens not to matter currently. > > Chandan Rajendra (1): > ext4: Enable encryption for subpage-sized blocks > > Eric Biggers (1): > fs/buffer.c: support fscrypt in block_read_full_page() > > Documentation/filesystems/fscrypt.rst | 4 +-- > fs/buffer.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > fs/ext4/super.c | 7 ---- > 3 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > Any more comments on this? Ted, are you interested in taking this through the ext4 tree for 5.5? - Eric