Re: [PATCH v6 0/9] Inline Encryption Support

Satya Tangirala
2020-01-08T18:43:13Z

On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 06:05:56AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> I haven't been able to deep dive into the details, but the structure
> of this still makes me very unhappy.
>
> Most of it is related to the software fallback again. Please split the
> fallback into a separate file, and also into a separate data structure.
> There is abslutely no need to have the overhead of the software only
> fields for the hardware case.
>
The fallback actually is in a separate file, and the software only fields
are not allocated in the hardware case anymore, either - I should have
made that clear(er) in the coverletter.
> On the counter side I think all the core block layer code added should
> go into a single file instead of split into three with some odd
> layering.
>
Alright, I'll look into this. I still think that the keyslot manager
should maybe go in a separate file because it does a specific, fairly
self contained task and isn't just block layer code - it's the interface
between the device drivers and any upper layer.
> Also what I don't understand is why this managed key-slots on a per-bio
> basis. Wou;dn't it make a whole lot more sense to manage them on a
> struct request basis once most of the merging has been performed?
I don't immediately see an issue with making it work on a struct request
basis. I'll look into this more carefully.

Thanks!
Satya