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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4398EC4332F for ; Thu, 10 Mar 2022 17:34:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S245145AbiCJRfy (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Mar 2022 12:35:54 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35106 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S240641AbiCJRfr (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Mar 2022 12:35:47 -0500 Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.220.28]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17B1018A783; Thu, 10 Mar 2022 09:34:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B943821118; Thu, 10 Mar 2022 17:34:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1646933684; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=9KDfpWUXGgNfwg4pSY2tFwPFDpbdq51qGNZu1umBHBc=; b=Y/2lVPlInBMkrgJSrPMjHHlOLqn6BrGzAizjvO9safctGhfDiHuVQndxq+p6nWyVW0A9qe SxgyKSGqd0hTqSHpv79Uf/XSFUQjJDOTD+qD+FC5K1LDwpw3JX1PhvaBPBi2AfMRYgJi8r eTvDtHVhu9JUDUa9fbulBk3q3S8XjIw= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1646933684; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=9KDfpWUXGgNfwg4pSY2tFwPFDpbdq51qGNZu1umBHBc=; b=jafbHF8U0MxchYh5bs34Hpq3mUAYqVpgCPedjIMwahSMukKrASxczdXGOA+GN3C4SQm6BV 979YKxLretGua9Cg== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55F7813A66; Thu, 10 Mar 2022 17:34:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id jDUkEbQ2KmJbNAAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Thu, 10 Mar 2022 17:34:44 +0000 Received: from localhost (brahms.olymp [local]) by brahms.olymp (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPA id 7fb2f45e; Thu, 10 Mar 2022 17:34:58 +0000 (UTC) From: =?utf-8?Q?Lu=C3=ADs_Henriques?= To: Jeff Layton Cc: Xiubo Li , Ilya Dryomov , ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Add support for snapshot names encryption References: <20220310172616.16212-1-lhenriques@suse.de> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2022 17:34:58 +0000 In-Reply-To: <20220310172616.16212-1-lhenriques@suse.de> (=?utf-8?Q?=22Lu?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=ADs?= Henriques"'s message of "Thu, 10 Mar 2022 17:26:14 +0000") Message-ID: <87ilsl7ltp.fsf@brahms.olymp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Lu=C3=ADs Henriques writes: > Hi! > > So, I've changed this code back into and RFC as I'm not sure yet if this > is it's final form. I think the 2 patches in this series should probably > be squashed into a single patch. I decided to keep them separate as the > 1st one is simple (it's the same patch I had already sent), and the 2nd > patch adds a lot more complexity to the whole thing. > > So, I've looked at Xiubo initial patch for handling snapshots long names. > It was complex, of course, and it required extra MDS changes. I *think* > my approach is slightly simpler, but I'm not entirely sure yet that I'm > handling every case. > > In order to test this code the following PRs are required: > > mds: add protection from clients without fscrypt support #45073 > mds: use the whole string as the snapshot long name #45192 > mds: support alternate names for snapshots #45224 > mds: limit the snapshot names to 240 characters #45312 > > Comments are welcome, I'm still testing these patches and I do expect to > find that something is still missing. And I do expect to find bugs. > These strings parsing scares me a lot, but I couldn't see a simpler > approach. Again, I forgot to mention in the cover-letter that handling base64-encoded snapshots that start with '_' is still missing. That's next on my list. Cheers, --=20 Lu=C3=ADs > > Lu=C3=ADs Henriques (2): > ceph: add support for encrypted snapshot names > ceph: add support for handling encrypted snapshot names in subtree > > fs/ceph/crypto.c | 146 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ > fs/ceph/crypto.h | 9 ++- > fs/ceph/dir.c | 9 +++ > fs/ceph/inode.c | 13 +++++ > 4 files changed, 156 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) >