From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Satya Tangirala <satyat@google.com>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Kim Boojin <boojin.kim@samsung.com>,
Kuohong Wang <kuohong.wang@mediatek.com>,
Barani Muthukumaran <bmuthuku@qti.qualcomm.com>,
linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 7/9] fscrypt: add inline encryption support
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2019 16:15:54 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191105001554.GA24056@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191031222500.GB111219@gmail.com>
On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 03:25:03PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> It's more important to clean up the IS_ENCRYPTED(inode) &&
> S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) checks that are duplicated in fs/{ext4,f2fs}/, so I've
> been thinking of adding a helper:
>
> static inline bool fscrypt_needs_contents_encryption(const struct inode *inode)
> {
> return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION) && IS_ENCRYPTED(inode) &&
> S_ISREG(inode->i_mode);
> }
Sounds fine.
> I don't think combining these things is a good idea because it would restrict
> the use of inline encryption to filesystems that allow IV_INO_LBLK_64 encryption
> policies, i.e. filesystems that have stable inode numbers, 32-bit inodes, and
> 32-bit file logical block numbers.
>
> The on-disk format (i.e. the type of encryption policy chosen) and the
> implementation (inline or filesystem-layer crypto) are really two separate
> things. This was one of the changes in v4 => v5 of this patchset; these two
> things used to be conflated but now they are separate. Now you can use inline
> encryption with the existing fscrypt policies too.
>
> We could use two separate SB_* flags, like SB_INLINE_CRYPT and
> SB_IV_INO_LBLK_64_SUPPORT.
Yes, I think that is a good idea.
> However, the ->has_stable_inodes() and
> ->get_ino_and_lblk_bits() methods are nice because they separate the filesystem
> properties from the question of "is this encryption policy supported".
> Declaring the filesystem properties is easier to do because it doesn't require
> any fscrypt-specific knowledge. Also, fs/crypto/ could use these properties in
> different ways in the future, e.g. if another IV generation scheme is added.
I don't really like writing up method boilerplates for something that
is a simple boolean flag.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-05 0:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-28 7:20 [PATCH v5 0/9] Inline Encryption Support Satya Tangirala
2019-10-28 7:20 ` [PATCH v5 1/9] block: Keyslot Manager for Inline Encryption Satya Tangirala
2019-10-31 18:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-10-28 7:20 ` [PATCH v5 2/9] block: Add encryption context to struct bio Satya Tangirala
2019-10-31 18:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-10-28 7:20 ` [PATCH v5 3/9] block: blk-crypto for Inline Encryption Satya Tangirala
2019-10-31 17:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-10-31 20:50 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-10-31 21:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-11-05 2:01 ` Eric Biggers
2019-11-05 15:39 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-10-28 7:20 ` [PATCH v5 4/9] scsi: ufs: UFS driver v2.1 spec crypto additions Satya Tangirala
2019-10-28 7:20 ` [PATCH v5 5/9] scsi: ufs: UFS crypto API Satya Tangirala
2019-10-31 18:23 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-10-28 7:20 ` [PATCH v5 6/9] scsi: ufs: Add inline encryption support to UFS Satya Tangirala
2019-10-31 18:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-10-28 7:20 ` [PATCH v5 7/9] fscrypt: add inline encryption support Satya Tangirala
2019-10-31 18:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-10-31 20:21 ` Eric Biggers
2019-10-31 21:21 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-10-31 22:25 ` Eric Biggers
2019-11-05 0:15 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2019-11-05 1:03 ` Eric Biggers
2019-11-05 3:12 ` Eric Biggers
2019-10-28 7:20 ` [PATCH v5 8/9] f2fs: " Satya Tangirala
2019-10-31 17:14 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2019-10-28 7:20 ` [PATCH v5 9/9] ext4: " Satya Tangirala
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=20191105001554.GA24056@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=bmuthuku@qti.qualcomm.com \
--cc=boojin.kim@samsung.com \
--cc=kuohong.wang@mediatek.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=satyat@google.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).