From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Niels de Vos <ndevos@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com>,
Marcel Lauhoff <marcel.lauhoff@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/4] fs: provide per-filesystem options to disable fscrypt
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2022 10:38:37 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y20a/akbY8Wcy3qg@mit.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221110141225.2308856-1-ndevos@redhat.com>
On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 03:12:21PM +0100, Niels de Vos wrote:
> While more filesystems are getting support for fscrypt, it is useful to
> be able to disable fscrypt for a selection of filesystems, while
> enabling it for others.
Could you say why you find it useful? Is it because you are concerned
about the increased binary size of a particular file system if fscrypt
is enabled? That hasn't been my experience, the hooks to call into
fscrypt are small and don't add too much to any one particular file
system; the bulk of the code is in fs/crypto.
Is it because people are pushing buggy code that doesn't compile if
you enable, say, CONFIG_FS_XXX and CONFIG_FSCRYPT at the same time?
Is it because a particular distribution doesn't want to support
fscrypt with a particular file system? If so, there have been plenty
of file system features for say, ext4, xfs, and btrfs, which aren't
supported by a distro, but there isn't a CONFIG_FS_XXX_YYY to disable
that feature, nor have any distros requested such a thing --- which is
good because it would be an explosion of new CONFIG parameters.
Or is it something else?
Note that nearly all of the file systems will only enable fscrypt if
some file system feature flag enabls it. So I'm not sure what's the
motivation behind adding this configuration option. If memory serves,
early in the fscrypt development we did have per-file system CONFIG's
for fscrypt, but we consciously removed it, just as we no longer have
per-file system CONFIG's to enable or disable Posix ACL's or extended
attributes, in the name of simplifying the kernel config.
Cheers,
- Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-10 15:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-10 14:12 [RFC 0/4] fs: provide per-filesystem options to disable fscrypt Niels de Vos
2022-11-10 14:12 ` [RFC 1/4] fscrypt: introduce USE_FS_ENCRYPTION Niels de Vos
2022-11-10 14:12 ` [RFC 2/4] fs: make fscrypt support an ext4 config option Niels de Vos
2022-11-10 14:12 ` [RFC 3/4] fs: make fscrypt support a f2fs " Niels de Vos
2022-11-10 14:12 ` [RFC 4/4] fs: make fscrypt support a UBIFS " Niels de Vos
2022-11-10 15:38 ` Theodore Ts'o [this message]
2022-11-10 16:47 ` [RFC 0/4] fs: provide per-filesystem options to disable fscrypt Niels de Vos
2022-11-10 18:15 ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-11-10 18:43 ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-11-18 13:05 ` Niels de Vos
2022-11-14 6:02 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-11-18 13:13 ` Niels de Vos
2022-11-16 2:10 ` Eric Biggers
2022-11-18 13:25 ` Niels de Vos
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=Y20a/akbY8Wcy3qg@mit.edu \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcel.lauhoff@suse.com \
--cc=ndevos@redhat.com \
--cc=xiubli@redhat.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