From: Baokun Li <libaokun@linux.alibaba.com>
To: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
ebiggers@kernel.org, jaegeuk@kernel.org, axboe@kernel.dk,
hch@lst.de, djwong@kernel.org, brauner@kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu,
berto@igalia.com, adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, jack@suse.cz,
yi.zhang@huawei.com, ojaswin@linux.ibm.com,
ritesh.list@gmail.com
Subject: [PATCH 00/13] block, ext4: allow encryption with a block size larger than the page size
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2026 01:09:45 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261011170958.1759230-1-libaokun@linux.alibaba.com> (raw)
Motivation
==========
ext4 supports a block size larger than the page size (LBS), e.g. a 32k
block size on a machine with 4k pages [1]. Encryption, however, is
still refused on such a filesystem: file contents used to be encrypted
page by page in the fs-layer path, which cannot handle a folio that
covers several data units, so the checks that refuse encryption with
such a block size stayed in place.
Since commit 5acc6f649a68 ("fscrypt: Always use blk-crypto for
contents on block-based filesystems") file contents are always
encrypted through blk-crypto. Inline encryption hardware can already
en/decrypt a data unit that spans several pages, but the fallback and
the block layer cannot carry such a data unit:
1. blk-crypto-fallback en/decrypts a data unit with the bio_vecs of
a single page-clamped segment, so a larger data unit fails with
BLK_STS_INVAL;
2. the block layer requires every bio_vec of an encrypted bio to be
data unit aligned, and splits such a bio without rounding the
split size down to the data unit size;
3. iomap cuts the direct I/O bios of an encrypted file only at the
logical block size of the device, so a bio can end in the middle
of a data unit.
This series adds the missing pieces on all three layers, removes the
refusals, and enables large folios for encrypted files on the way.
[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251121090654.631996-1-libaokun@huaweicloud.com
Patch Overview
==============
* Patches 1-2 (ext4, from Alberto Garcia) [2]: Refuse to set an
encryption policy when the block size is larger than the page size,
and reject encrypted inodes of such a filesystem. They are the
fix for the stable branches; patch 11 removes the refusals again
for mainline. They are carried along unchanged so that the series
applies cleanly on its own and avoids adaptation conflicts with
the stable fix.
* Patch 3 (blk-crypto): Reject the data unit sizes that
blk-crypto-fallback can't handle when the key is set up, instead of
failing every I/O with BLK_STS_INVAL.
* Patches 4-6 (blk-crypto-fallback): En/decrypt one data unit per
crypto request, so that a data unit can span several bio_vecs, and
support the data units that are larger than a page, whose bio_vecs
and scatterlists come from a mempool.
* Patch 7 (iomap): Cut the direct I/O bios of encrypted files at the
block size, so that they cover whole data units.
* Patches 8-10 (block): Round the split size of an encrypted bio
down to the data unit size, warn when a bio that must be split
cannot be split into a valid request, and drop the per-bio_vec data
unit alignment requirement, which a data unit larger than a page
cannot satisfy. The contract is documented: an encrypted bio
starts at a data unit boundary and covers whole data units.
* Patches 11-13 (ext4): Remove the refusals, route the folios that
cover a data unit number wraparound to the buffer_head read path,
and enable large folios for encrypted files.
[2]: https://lore.kernel.org/r/cover.1790343958.git.berto@igalia.com
Benchmark
=========
Hardware: 96-core machine, 3.84T NVMe, 512G memory
Filesystem: ext4, encryption on the fallback path
Buffered sequential 1M writes and reads (1G, fsync) in MiB/s; medians
of 3 runs.
Base tree, 4k-block filesystem:
job 4k plain 4k enc
-------- -------- ------
seqwrite 1966 1134
seqread 1878 996
With LBS enabled, encrypted 4k-block vs 32k-block filesystem:
job 4k enc 32k enc 32k plain 4k->32k
-------- ------ ------- --------- -------
seqwrite 1044 1399 2062 +34%
seqread 931 1793 1791 +93%
Buffered sequential writes (1G, fsync) of the encrypted 4k-block
filesystem across request sizes, base tree vs this series:
bs Before After gain
---- ------ ----- ----
4k 1118 1162 +4%
16k 1260 1756 +39%
64k 1272 1977 +55%
256k 1308 2081 +59%
1M 1260 1455 +15%
Testing
=======
* kvm-xfstests -c ext4/all -g encrypt (which includes ext4/32k) has
been executed with no new failures.
* Manually verified read/write, fallocate -z and punch hole on 4k,
8k, 16k and 32k block sizes, and direct I/O with a properly
aligned user buffer on 4k, 8k and 32k block sizes.
* Manually verified fsx and fsstress on a 64k block size, and direct
I/O to an encrypted file on a 64k block size with a user buffer
backed by large folios.
Comments and questions are, as always, welcome.
Thanks,
Baokun
Alberto Garcia (2):
ext4: refuse encryption when block size > page size
ext4: reject encrypted inodes when block size > page size
Baokun Li (11):
blk-crypto: reject fallback data unit sizes it can't handle
blk-crypto: decrypt one data unit per crypto request
blk-crypto: encrypt one data unit per crypto request
blk-crypto: support data units larger than a page
iomap: align the direct I/O bios of encrypted files to the block size
block: split encrypted bios at data unit boundaries
block: warn about bios that can't be split
block: don't require data unit aligned bio_vecs for encrypted bios
ext4: allow encryption with a block size larger than the page size
ext4: send folios that cover a wraparound to the buffer_head path
ext4: allow large folios for encrypted files
Documentation/block/inline-encryption.rst | 13 +
block/blk-crypto-fallback.c | 446 +++++++++++++++++-----
block/blk-crypto-internal.h | 4 +-
block/blk-crypto.c | 40 +-
block/blk-merge.c | 48 ++-
fs/crypto/block.c | 3 +
fs/ext4/readpage.c | 11 +
fs/ext4/super.c | 22 +-
fs/iomap/direct-io.c | 10 +
9 files changed, 462 insertions(+), 135 deletions(-)
base-commit: fd73f4a6659897191fa0d40695fe370925dd3780
--
2.43.7
next reply other threads:[~2026-10-11 17:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-11 17:09 Baokun Li [this message]
2026-10-11 17:09 ` [PATCH 01/13] ext4: refuse encryption when block size > page size Baokun Li
2026-10-11 17:26 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-11 17:09 ` [PATCH 02/13] ext4: reject encrypted inodes " Baokun Li
2026-10-11 17:16 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-11 17:09 ` [PATCH 03/13] blk-crypto: reject fallback data unit sizes it can't handle Baokun Li
2026-10-11 17:20 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-12 7:50 ` Baokun Li
2026-10-11 17:09 ` [PATCH 04/13] blk-crypto: decrypt one data unit per crypto request Baokun Li
2026-10-11 17:19 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-11 17:09 ` [PATCH 05/13] blk-crypto: encrypt " Baokun Li
2026-10-11 17:26 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-11 17:09 ` [PATCH 06/13] blk-crypto: support data units larger than a page Baokun Li
2026-10-11 17:27 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-11 17:09 ` [PATCH 07/13] iomap: align the direct I/O bios of encrypted files to the block size Baokun Li
2026-10-11 17:25 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-11 17:09 ` [PATCH 08/13] block: split encrypted bios at data unit boundaries Baokun Li
2026-10-11 17:20 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-11 17:09 ` [PATCH 09/13] block: warn about bios that can't be split Baokun Li
2026-10-11 17:18 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-11 17:09 ` [PATCH 10/13] block: don't require data unit aligned bio_vecs for encrypted bios Baokun Li
2026-10-11 17:24 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-12 8:09 ` Baokun Li
2026-10-11 17:09 ` [PATCH 11/13] ext4: allow encryption with a block size larger than the page size Baokun Li
2026-10-11 17:30 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-11 17:09 ` [PATCH 12/13] ext4: send folios that cover a wraparound to the buffer_head path Baokun Li
2026-10-11 17:22 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-11 17:09 ` [PATCH 13/13] ext4: allow large folios for encrypted files Baokun Li
2026-10-11 17:23 ` sashiko-bot
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=20261011170958.1759230-1-libaokun@linux.alibaba.com \
--to=libaokun@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=adilger.kernel@dilger.ca \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=berto@igalia.com \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=ebiggers@kernel.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ojaswin@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=yi.zhang@huawei.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox