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=-5.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 69CEFC433E1 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 19:02:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3359B2074D for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 19:02:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="0NFqhuHe"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="pdjxD/lw" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 3359B2074D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-mtd-bounces+linux-mtd=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=QzUDSZEHm0eaLnZCO++6DLOc9hO6pKE+kstxSmWl/9A=; b=0NFqhuHe93D3IpBmFviEC6f6j rvHa9x8YH/tdK5VmhuO2L0axtUfmWwmxi2A9lgKv2wvdXU7KXnhcity63fK0JY5RicPPlqlStqRCf pXZlgSM90FqZPSC6J+IkvCIGpCfKWyzDH3gfbVZCzSb4Eb4Akc8qvJRuNuHUR63dFdPvaSxq0b5PS iwsgyG1+KBfv4oakk+gtWpMfVxzfmWEEDW7sljKI4jTYFR0RsJ5NEq7HBabgyDrKHRyXqZ6CzbTwE 8Meb63rxcE9Dsy3JSP3ah3M9mlhFb2/rYWEnCS3JL871TNQ/fQoLwP4lsnwC0HTXMWAf++0PjaZWa nyCWyv3Gg==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kAHje-0004HQ-01; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 19:02:26 +0000 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kAHjb-0004GP-OD for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 19:02:24 +0000 Received: from gmail.com (unknown [104.132.1.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 02E3B2074D; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 19:02:22 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1598295743; bh=4xcF3VJfP2pWkLD1MnKiWLH5hBlNe6WvpXlcG9/bUNk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=pdjxD/lwTwBs8AMDefIpz33YuP0AtYiNyavtRQr7lkpfBZj7RlqkpM378485De4nk WH0Io2eXyxKz4zDfMcK7dt1yFN7UttRHrNEce14Xwaq8moKGEBPL4gFCn/kyTHytpj W4soZI4coKBqQkVSP1hI08dnY7nJ+NgIw/mSNY5g= Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 12:02:21 -0700 From: Eric Biggers To: Jeff Layton Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/8] fscrypt: add fscrypt_prepare_new_inode() and fscrypt_set_context() Message-ID: <20200824190221.GC1650861@gmail.com> References: <20200824061712.195654-1-ebiggers@kernel.org> <20200824061712.195654-2-ebiggers@kernel.org> <0cf5638796e7cddacc38dcd1e967368b99f0069a.camel@kernel.org> <20200824182114.GB1650861@gmail.com> <06a7d9562b84354eb72bd67c9d4b7262dac53457.camel@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <06a7d9562b84354eb72bd67c9d4b7262dac53457.camel@kernel.org> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200824_150223_897339_B810EA8C X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 21.42 ) X-BeenThere: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-mtd" Errors-To: linux-mtd-bounces+linux-mtd=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 02:47:07PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > On Mon, 2020-08-24 at 11:21 -0700, Eric Biggers wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 12:48:48PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > > > > +void fscrypt_hash_inode_number(struct fscrypt_info *ci, > > > > + const struct fscrypt_master_key *mk) > > > > +{ > > > > + WARN_ON(ci->ci_inode->i_ino == 0); > > > > + WARN_ON(!mk->mk_ino_hash_key_initialized); > > > > + > > > > + ci->ci_hashed_ino = (u32)siphash_1u64(ci->ci_inode->i_ino, > > > > + &mk->mk_ino_hash_key); > > > > > > i_ino is an unsigned long. Will this produce a consistent results on > > > arches with 32 and 64 bit long values? I think it'd be nice to ensure > > > that we can access an encrypted directory created on a 32-bit host from > > > (e.g.) a 64-bit host. > > > > The result is the same regardless of word size and endianness. > > siphash_1u64(v, k) is equivalent to: > > > > __le64 x = cpu_to_le64(v); > > siphash(&x, 8, k); > > > > In the case where you have an (on-storage) inode number that is larger > than 2^32, x will almost certainly be different on a 32 vs. 64-bit > wordsize. > > On the box with the 32-bit wordsize, you'll end up promoting i_ino to a > 64-bit word and the upper 32 bits will be zeroed out. So it seems like > this means that if you're using inline hardware you're going to end up > with a result that won't work correctly across different wordsizes. That's only possible if the VFS is truncating the inode number, which would also break userspace in lots of ways like making applications think that files are hard-linked together when they aren't. Also, IV_INO_LBLK_64 would break. The correct fix for that would be to make inode::i_ino 64-bit. Note that ext4 and f2fs (currently the only filesystems that support the IV_INO_LBLK_* flags) only support 32-bit inode numbers. - Eric ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/