From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0CAF3D81; Sun, 10 Aug 2025 09:04:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1754816643; cv=none; b=AZEqqq+OleNWKbpQkIxIJmcZraocZqsHFYZqLvRQqVXElyphSnLhB1ltnuXgCI5Xb7Ef8K/EWplTHrBvQVIfdL36uti0/0SEMxVf65cy8G91PJ8JuPTsqALa1xyzAsh1aB/lRg2mXuMy5Q44eRiBeaCFNhYYBSz0hFZiIHj5aPg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1754816643; c=relaxed/simple; bh=1uk+L/4UCvC2YL4rDydg69JfuP7irpTtoBtvSgNeL/E=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=CfhI5PqwsyTG9+7zlQuda3zRwg8g7KUQO//oAOKxKF7uWwVPU+EWOfTd2GRX5kVffkDa147RfSIVIouxCtUwy8nZk/wWekKUKVP7uZUrHDvoLmc8tttHY53hmpRQyDXnYKtzumNU2KP1uXojH+GSAgX3FoamRHZGS7jO/Bm0mrs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=LjfGKeZQ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="LjfGKeZQ" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1526CC4CEEB; Sun, 10 Aug 2025 09:04:03 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1754816643; bh=1uk+L/4UCvC2YL4rDydg69JfuP7irpTtoBtvSgNeL/E=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=LjfGKeZQqiIXfnvbaJEgwYP+/u4ykE3RMP5XuJzst3yu07DMinG6FVd0er4RWR7oT 8rY+yL96FW8wFvnuHh6n/P2s+zyfPAo9USy6Gr5e8LHi9ieo1muby/ThPMT0jC2MJ6 +BlYRh3l88+NlLoHLFQJG3gzW5nF6vc4t6gkOhKIHNw3TiipDPKog5V9JjwNkUWtz3 zCiZEvSodHKopxJzcGudkBciWnHKKucIFIE0/37Uv9R1AJd8/jKkBRWXDhzx62YRFE ckhJ7XvPfWXPJA+9rnHx/WIF2A1CRYUoHGhVluTekBsgPvo1ZHEvNC53HIiH5g5ol/ j4fq4OzXJw1Ng== Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2025 02:03:02 -0700 From: Eric Biggers To: Christian Brauner Cc: linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, fsverity@lists.linux.dev, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/13] Move fscrypt and fsverity info out of struct inode Message-ID: <20250810090302.GA1274@sol> References: <20250810075706.172910-1-ebiggers@kernel.org> <20250810-tortur-gerammt-8d9ffd00da19@brauner> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250810-tortur-gerammt-8d9ffd00da19@brauner> On Sun, Aug 10, 2025 at 10:47:32AM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: > On Sun, Aug 10, 2025 at 12:56:53AM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote: > > This is a cleaned-up implementation of moving the i_crypt_info and > > i_verity_info pointers out of 'struct inode' and into the fs-specific > > part of the inode, as proposed previously by Christian at > > https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250723-work-inode-fscrypt-v4-0-c8e11488a0e6@kernel.org/ > > > > The high-level concept is still the same: fs/crypto/ and fs/verity/ > > locate the pointer by adding an offset to the address of struct inode. > > The offset is retrieved from fscrypt_operations or fsverity_operations. > > > > I've cleaned up a lot of the details, including: > > - Grouped changes into patches differently > > - Rewrote commit messages and comments to be clearer > > - Adjusted code formatting to be consistent with existing code > > - Removed unneeded #ifdefs > > - Improved choice and location of VFS_WARN_ON_ONCE() statements > > - Added missing kerneldoc for ubifs_inode::i_crypt_info > > - Moved field initialization to init_once functions when they exist > > - Improved ceph offset calculation and removed unneeded static_asserts > > - fsverity_get_info() now checks IS_VERITY() instead of v_ops > > - fscrypt_put_encryption_info() no longer checks IS_ENCRYPTED(), since I > > no longer think it's actually correct there. > > - verity_data_blocks() now keeps doing a raw dereference > > - Dropped fscrypt_set_inode_info() > > - Renamed some functions > > - Do offset calculation using int, so we don't rely on unsigned overflow > > - And more. > > > > For v4 and earlier, see > > https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250723-work-inode-fscrypt-v4-0-c8e11488a0e6@kernel.org/ > > > > I'd like to take this series through the fscrypt tree for 6.18. > > (fsverity normally has a separate tree, but by choosing just one tree > > for this, we'll avoid conflicts in some places.) > > Woh woh. First, I had a cleaned up version ready for v6.18 so if you > plan on taking over someone's series and resend then maybe ask the > author first whether that's ok or not. I haven't seen you do that. You > just caused duplicated work for no reason. Ah, sorry about that. When I started looking at it again yesterday there turned out to be way too many cleanups and fixes I wanted to make (beyond the comments I gave earlier), and I hadn't seen activity from you on it in a while. So I figured it would be easier to just send a series myself. But I should have asked you first, sorry. > And second general infrastructure changes that touch multiple fses and > generic fs infrastructure I very much want to go through VFS trees. > We'll simply use a shared tree. So you'd like to discontinue the fscrypt and fsverity trees? That's what they are for: general infrastructure shared by multiple filesystems. Or is this comment just for this series in particular, presumably because it touches 'struct inode'? - Eric