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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31EF7C04A6B for ; Mon, 6 May 2019 11:35:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0ED93206BF for ; Mon, 6 May 2019 11:35:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726147AbfEFLfD (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 May 2019 07:35:03 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:53138 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725852AbfEFLfD (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 May 2019 07:35:03 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098419.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x46BYoTg127035 for ; Mon, 6 May 2019 07:35:02 -0400 Received: from e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.99]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2sam048a1h-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 06 May 2019 07:34:55 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 6 May 2019 12:33:47 +0100 Received: from b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.198) by e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.133) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Mon, 6 May 2019 12:33:43 +0100 Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.62]) by b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x46BXgxt39059600 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 6 May 2019 11:33:43 GMT Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id D569DAE055; Mon, 6 May 2019 11:33:42 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 748AAAE053; Mon, 6 May 2019 11:33:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [9.85.70.42]) by d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Mon, 6 May 2019 11:33:41 +0000 (GMT) From: Chandan Rajendra To: Eric Biggers Cc: linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/13] fscrypt: introduce fscrypt_decrypt_block_inplace() Date: Mon, 06 May 2019 14:31:58 +0530 Organization: IBM In-Reply-To: <20190501224515.43059-9-ebiggers@kernel.org> References: <20190501224515.43059-1-ebiggers@kernel.org> <20190501224515.43059-9-ebiggers@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 19050611-0012-0000-0000-00000318CA52 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19050611-0013-0000-0000-0000215142F5 Message-Id: <1926821.WNcHRD5IIQ@dhcp-9-109-212-164> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-05-06_07:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=1 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=628 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1905060102 Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday, May 2, 2019 4:15:10 AM IST Eric Biggers wrote: > From: Eric Biggers > > fscrypt_decrypt_page() behaves very differently depending on whether the > filesystem set FS_CFLG_OWN_PAGES in its fscrypt_operations. This makes > the function difficult to understand and document. It also makes it so > that all callers have to provide inode and lblk_num, when fscrypt could > determine these itself for pagecache pages. > > Therefore, move the FS_CFLG_OWN_PAGES behavior into a new function > fscrypt_decrypt_block_inplace(). > Looks good to me, Reviewed-by: Chandan Rajendra -- chandan