From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Satya Tangirala <satyat@google.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
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>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/9] block: Inline encryption support for blk-mq
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 15:34:59 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200224233459.GA30288@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200222005233.GA209268@google.com>
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 04:52:33PM -0800, Satya Tangirala wrote:
> > What is the rationale for this limitation? Restricting unrelated
> > features from being used together is a pretty bad design pattern and
> > should be avoided where possible. If it can't it needs to be documented
> > very clearly.
> >
> My understanding of blk-integrity is that for writes, blk-integrity
> generates some integrity info for a bio and sends it along with the bio,
> and the device on the other end verifies that the data it received to
> write matches up with the integrity info provided with the bio, and
> saves the integrity info along with the data. As for reads, the device
> sends the data along with the saved integrity info and blk-integrity
> verifies that the data received matches up with the integrity info.
Yes, a device supporting inline encryption and integrity will have to
update the guard tag to match the encrypted data as well. That alone
is a good enough reason to reject the combination for now until it
is fully supported. It needs to be properly document, and I think
we should also do it at probe time if possible, not when submitting
I/O.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Satya Tangirala <satyat@google.com>
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, 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,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH v7 2/9] block: Inline encryption support for blk-mq
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 15:34:59 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200224233459.GA30288@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200222005233.GA209268@google.com>
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 04:52:33PM -0800, Satya Tangirala wrote:
> > What is the rationale for this limitation? Restricting unrelated
> > features from being used together is a pretty bad design pattern and
> > should be avoided where possible. If it can't it needs to be documented
> > very clearly.
> >
> My understanding of blk-integrity is that for writes, blk-integrity
> generates some integrity info for a bio and sends it along with the bio,
> and the device on the other end verifies that the data it received to
> write matches up with the integrity info provided with the bio, and
> saves the integrity info along with the data. As for reads, the device
> sends the data along with the saved integrity info and blk-integrity
> verifies that the data received matches up with the integrity info.
Yes, a device supporting inline encryption and integrity will have to
update the guard tag to match the encrypted data as well. That alone
is a good enough reason to reject the combination for now until it
is fully supported. It needs to be properly document, and I think
we should also do it at probe time if possible, not when submitting
I/O.
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-24 23:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 80+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-21 11:50 [PATCH v7 0/9] Inline Encryption Support Satya Tangirala
2020-02-21 11:50 ` [f2fs-dev] " Satya Tangirala via Linux-f2fs-devel
2020-02-21 11:50 ` [PATCH v7 1/9] block: Keyslot Manager for Inline Encryption Satya Tangirala
2020-02-21 11:50 ` [f2fs-dev] " Satya Tangirala via Linux-f2fs-devel
2020-02-21 17:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-21 17:04 ` [f2fs-dev] " Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-21 17:31 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-21 17:31 ` [f2fs-dev] " Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-27 18:14 ` Eric Biggers
2020-02-27 18:14 ` [f2fs-dev] " Eric Biggers
2020-02-27 21:25 ` Satya Tangirala
2020-02-27 21:25 ` [f2fs-dev] " Satya Tangirala via Linux-f2fs-devel
2020-03-05 16:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-03-05 16:11 ` [f2fs-dev] " Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-27 18:48 ` Eric Biggers
2020-02-27 18:48 ` [f2fs-dev] " Eric Biggers
2020-02-21 11:50 ` [PATCH v7 2/9] block: Inline encryption support for blk-mq Satya Tangirala
2020-02-21 11:50 ` [f2fs-dev] " Satya Tangirala via Linux-f2fs-devel
2020-02-21 17:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-21 17:22 ` [f2fs-dev] " Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-22 0:52 ` Satya Tangirala
2020-02-22 0:52 ` [f2fs-dev] " Satya Tangirala via Linux-f2fs-devel
2020-02-24 23:34 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2020-02-24 23:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-27 18:25 ` Eric Biggers
2020-02-27 18:25 ` [f2fs-dev] " Eric Biggers
2020-02-21 11:50 ` [PATCH v7 3/9] block: blk-crypto-fallback for Inline Encryption Satya Tangirala
2020-02-21 11:50 ` [f2fs-dev] " Satya Tangirala via Linux-f2fs-devel
2020-02-21 16:51 ` Randy Dunlap
2020-02-21 16:51 ` [f2fs-dev] " Randy Dunlap
2020-02-21 17:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-21 17:25 ` [f2fs-dev] " Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-21 17:35 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-21 17:35 ` [f2fs-dev] " Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-21 18:34 ` Eric Biggers
2020-02-21 18:34 ` [f2fs-dev] " Eric Biggers
2020-02-24 23:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-24 23:36 ` [f2fs-dev] " Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-27 19:25 ` Eric Biggers
2020-02-27 19:25 ` [f2fs-dev] " Eric Biggers
2020-02-21 11:50 ` [PATCH v7 4/9] scsi: ufs: UFS driver v2.1 spec crypto additions Satya Tangirala
2020-02-21 11:50 ` [f2fs-dev] " Satya Tangirala via Linux-f2fs-devel
2020-02-21 11:50 ` [PATCH v7 5/9] scsi: ufs: UFS crypto API Satya Tangirala
2020-02-21 11:50 ` [f2fs-dev] " Satya Tangirala via Linux-f2fs-devel
2020-02-22 4:59 ` Eric Biggers
2020-02-22 4:59 ` [f2fs-dev] " Eric Biggers
2020-02-21 11:50 ` [PATCH v7 6/9] scsi: ufs: Add inline encryption support to UFS Satya Tangirala
2020-02-21 11:50 ` [f2fs-dev] " Satya Tangirala via Linux-f2fs-devel
2020-02-21 17:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-21 17:22 ` [f2fs-dev] " Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-21 18:11 ` Eric Biggers
2020-02-21 18:11 ` [f2fs-dev] " Eric Biggers
2020-02-23 13:47 ` Stanley Chu
2020-02-23 13:47 ` [f2fs-dev] " Stanley Chu
2020-02-24 23:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-24 23:37 ` [f2fs-dev] " Christoph Hellwig
2020-02-25 7:21 ` Stanley Chu
2020-02-25 7:21 ` [f2fs-dev] " Stanley Chu
2020-02-26 1:12 ` Eric Biggers
2020-02-26 1:12 ` [f2fs-dev] " Eric Biggers
2020-02-26 6:43 ` Stanley Chu
2020-02-26 6:43 ` [f2fs-dev] " Stanley Chu
2020-03-02 9:17 ` Stanley Chu
2020-03-02 9:17 ` [f2fs-dev] " Stanley Chu
2020-02-21 11:50 ` [PATCH v7 7/9] fscrypt: add inline encryption support Satya Tangirala
2020-02-21 11:50 ` [f2fs-dev] " Satya Tangirala via Linux-f2fs-devel
2020-02-21 18:40 ` Eric Biggers
2020-02-21 18:40 ` [f2fs-dev] " Eric Biggers
2020-02-22 5:39 ` Eric Biggers
2020-02-22 5:39 ` [f2fs-dev] " Eric Biggers
2020-02-26 0:30 ` Eric Biggers
2020-02-26 0:30 ` [f2fs-dev] " Eric Biggers
2020-02-21 11:50 ` [PATCH v7 8/9] f2fs: " Satya Tangirala
2020-02-21 11:50 ` [f2fs-dev] " Satya Tangirala via Linux-f2fs-devel
2020-02-21 11:50 ` [PATCH v7 9/9] ext4: " Satya Tangirala
2020-02-21 11:50 ` [f2fs-dev] " Satya Tangirala via Linux-f2fs-devel
2020-02-22 5:21 ` Eric Biggers
2020-02-22 5:21 ` [f2fs-dev] " Eric Biggers
2020-02-21 17:16 ` [PATCH v7 0/9] Inline Encryption Support Eric Biggers
2020-02-21 17:16 ` [f2fs-dev] " 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=20200224233459.GA30288@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-ext4@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 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.