From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, fstests@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] xfstests: test adding filesystem-level fscrypt key via key_id
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2019 10:00:55 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191211180054.GB82952@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191211095019.GA7077@linux.intel.com>
Hi Jarkko,
On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 11:50:19AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 02:57:59PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > You could manually do what the xfstest does, which is more or less the following
> > (requires xfs_io patched with https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11252795/):
>
> I postpone testing/reviewing this patch up until its depedencies are in
> the mainline.
>
> I'll add these to my tree as soon as we have addressed a critical bug
> in tpm_tis:
>
> 1. KEYS: remove CONFIG_KEYS_COMPAT
> 2. KEYS: asymmetric: return ENOMEM if akcipher_request_alloc() fails
>
> Just mentioning that I haven't forgotten them.
>
xfstests and xfsprogs are developed separately from the kernel, and their
maintainers don't apply patches that depend on non-mainlined features. So
unless there are objections to the kernel patch [1], in a couple weeks I'll
apply it to the fscrypt tree for 5.6, and then once it's in mainline I'll resend
the patches for the test. I've simply sent the test out early as an RFC, in
case it helps reviewing the kernel patch or in case there are early comments.
Again, while you're certainly welcome to manually test the kernel patch, it's
more important that we have test coverage of it in xfstests.
[1] https://lkml.kernel.org/linux-fscrypt/20191119222447.226853-1-ebiggers@kernel.org/
- Eric
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, fstests@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] xfstests: test adding filesystem-level fscrypt key via key_id
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2019 18:00:55 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191211180054.GB82952@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191211095019.GA7077@linux.intel.com>
Hi Jarkko,
On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 11:50:19AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 02:57:59PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > You could manually do what the xfstest does, which is more or less the following
> > (requires xfs_io patched with https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11252795/):
>
> I postpone testing/reviewing this patch up until its depedencies are in
> the mainline.
>
> I'll add these to my tree as soon as we have addressed a critical bug
> in tpm_tis:
>
> 1. KEYS: remove CONFIG_KEYS_COMPAT
> 2. KEYS: asymmetric: return ENOMEM if akcipher_request_alloc() fails
>
> Just mentioning that I haven't forgotten them.
>
xfstests and xfsprogs are developed separately from the kernel, and their
maintainers don't apply patches that depend on non-mainlined features. So
unless there are objections to the kernel patch [1], in a couple weeks I'll
apply it to the fscrypt tree for 5.6, and then once it's in mainline I'll resend
the patches for the test. I've simply sent the test out early as an RFC, in
case it helps reviewing the kernel patch or in case there are early comments.
Again, while you're certainly welcome to manually test the kernel patch, it's
more important that we have test coverage of it in xfstests.
[1] https://lkml.kernel.org/linux-fscrypt/20191119222447.226853-1-ebiggers@kernel.org/
- Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-11 18:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-19 22:31 [RFC PATCH 0/3] xfstests: test adding filesystem-level fscrypt key via key_id Eric Biggers
2019-11-19 22:31 ` Eric Biggers
2019-11-19 22:31 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] common/rc: handle option with argument in _require_xfs_io_command() Eric Biggers
2019-11-19 22:31 ` Eric Biggers
2019-11-19 22:31 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] common/encrypt: move constant test key to common code Eric Biggers
2019-11-19 22:31 ` Eric Biggers
2019-11-19 22:31 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] generic: test adding filesystem-level fscrypt key via key_id Eric Biggers
2019-11-19 22:31 ` Eric Biggers
2019-11-21 0:25 ` Eric Biggers
2019-11-21 0:25 ` Eric Biggers
2019-11-27 20:45 ` [RFC PATCH 0/3] xfstests: " Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-11-27 20:45 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-11-27 20:46 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-11-27 20:46 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-11-27 22:57 ` Eric Biggers
2019-11-27 22:57 ` Eric Biggers
2019-12-11 9:50 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-12-11 9:50 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-12-11 18:00 ` Eric Biggers [this message]
2019-12-11 18:00 ` Eric Biggers
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=20191211180054.GB82952@gmail.com \
--to=ebiggers@kernel.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=keyrings@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.