From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qg0-f50.google.com ([209.85.192.50]:36004 "EHLO mail-qg0-f50.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750997AbcCAR6L (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Mar 2016 12:58:11 -0500 Received: by mail-qg0-f50.google.com with SMTP id u110so19066724qge.3 for ; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 09:58:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [RFC] Experimental btrfs encryption To: Chris Mason , Tomasz Torcz , linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org References: <1456848492-4814-1-git-send-email-anand.jain@oracle.com> <20160301162952.GB718307@mother.pipebreaker.pl> <20160301164616.dbbeuzccfkzupign@floor.thefacebook.com> From: "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" Message-ID: <56D5D7E0.1040103@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 12:56:48 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160301164616.dbbeuzccfkzupign@floor.thefacebook.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 2016-03-01 11:46, Chris Mason wrote: > On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 05:29:52PM +0100, Tomasz Torcz wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 12:08:09AM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: >>> This patchset adds btrfs encryption support. >>> >>> Warning: >>> The code is in prototype/experimental stage and is not suitable >>> for the production data yet. >> >> Can you share some design documents? Will it be compatible >> with existing encrypting filesystems: >> – ext4 ? >> – ZFS ? >> >> It would be nice to have common API for encryption, not a dozen >> of filesystem-specific interfaces. > > We'll definitely move in line with the common API over time. Thanks > Anand for starting this! > > I'd prefer that we keep it per-subvolume for now, just because > subvolumes are so cheap and because it seems like a better collection > point for general use. But as the other filesystems add features we'll > make sure and keep parity with what users expect. I hate to tell you, but if you want feature parity, it needs to have \ per-file functionality from the start. Both ext4 and F2FS do per-file, as does NTFS (not certain about ZFS, but people are not as likely to be coming to BTRFS from ZFS as they are from ext4 or F2FS from what I've seen).