From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3830C4332F for ; Fri, 4 Nov 2022 07:28:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229598AbiKDH2d (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Nov 2022 03:28:33 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:54456 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229884AbiKDH2Q (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Nov 2022 03:28:16 -0400 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4641:c500::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2422D2982D; Fri, 4 Nov 2022 00:28:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD496620D2; Fri, 4 Nov 2022 07:28:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D14D1C433D6; Fri, 4 Nov 2022 07:28:14 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1667546895; bh=fbWGgbdJBtNAz3pN1HaYyaU1xkkr+pI3p1rhDkRjRSw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Dd1QCBFpBu+RcloXNFmkOCRAsWKfNldK0gpfq/cAHinRR57UFT7RdudFR0v06ZjlF fSCYR7xwaxZ6O4RVyKM7d82KtFOnwtCjrMPYINScDroOlOYrlw/ngc9rGtYGYgNrN4 KCPRSz9DZUvaaKbDV3XjFfFJwB55xwE8OYUSMVhDAZVZbgKi3jZWwIVisWpYjw+3so 1RdOxP8gglFhqHmPNdAdilUtD3FZot9+w6Z7+RlqzR9Hni2Vwh0qjgsVq3Ffwr8AXi 87OfB+R2LhjgOtF6w5tiG32cCxC8Qcw/PHC4PEpM5wEv+8+/XvSx5OjXOR9fU93i4W QP/yXmumj/UsA== Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2022 00:28:13 -0700 From: Eric Biggers To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Jens Axboe , Mike Snitzer , "Theodore Y. Ts'o" , Jaegeuk Kim , dm-devel@redhat.com, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] blk-crypto: don't use struct request_queue for public interfaces Message-ID: References: <20221104054621.628369-1-hch@lst.de> <20221104054621.628369-2-hch@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20221104054621.628369-2-hch@lst.de> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Nov 04, 2022 at 06:46:20AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Each device driver that > wants to support inline encryption will construct a blk_crypto_profile, then > -associate it with the disk's request_queue. > +associate it with the block device. > [...] > -Once the driver registers a blk_crypto_profile with a request_queue, I/O > +Once the driver registers a blk_crypto_profile with a block_device, I/O > requests the driver receives via that queue may have an encryption context. [...] > -Request queue based layered devices like dm-rq that wish to support inline > -encryption need to create their own blk_crypto_profile for their request_queue, > +Request based layered devices like dm-rq that wish to support inline > +encryption need to create their own blk_crypto_profile for their block_device, > and expose whatever functionality they choose. When a layered device wants to [...] Shouldn't the three places above still say request_queue, not block_device? They're talking about the driver. - Eric