From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org,
Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@collabora.com>,
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.10] ext4: only allow test_dummy_encryption when supported
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2022 11:54:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yp8gZlE6oEhXIRzD@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220606231233.165860-1-ebiggers@kernel.org>
On Mon, Jun 06, 2022 at 04:12:33PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
>
> commit 5f41fdaea63ddf96d921ab36b2af4a90ccdb5744 upstream.
>
> Make the test_dummy_encryption mount option require that the encrypt
> feature flag be already enabled on the filesystem, rather than
> automatically enabling it. Practically, this means that "-O encrypt"
> will need to be included in MKFS_OPTIONS when running xfstests with the
> test_dummy_encryption mount option. (ext4/053 also needs an update.)
>
> Moreover, as long as the preconditions for test_dummy_encryption are
> being tightened anyway, take the opportunity to start rejecting it when
> !CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION rather than ignoring it.
>
> The motivation for requiring the encrypt feature flag is that:
>
> - Having the filesystem auto-enable feature flags is problematic, as it
> bypasses the usual sanity checks. The specific issue which came up
> recently is that in kernel versions where ext4 supports casefold but
> not encrypt+casefold (v5.1 through v5.10), the kernel will happily add
> the encrypt flag to a filesystem that has the casefold flag, making it
> unmountable -- but only for subsequent mounts, not the initial one.
> This confused the casefold support detection in xfstests, causing
> generic/556 to fail rather than be skipped.
>
> - The xfstests-bld test runners (kvm-xfstests et al.) already use the
> required mkfs flag, so they will not be affected by this change. Only
> users of test_dummy_encryption alone will be affected. But, this
> option has always been for testing only, so it should be fine to
> require that the few users of this option update their test scripts.
>
> - f2fs already requires it (for its equivalent feature flag).
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
> Reviewed-by: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@collabora.com>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220519204437.61645-1-ebiggers@kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Both now queued up, thanks.
greg k-h
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-07 9:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-06 23:12 [PATCH 5.10] ext4: only allow test_dummy_encryption when supported Eric Biggers
2022-06-07 9:54 ` Greg KH [this message]
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=Yp8gZlE6oEhXIRzD@kroah.com \
--to=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=ebiggers@kernel.org \
--cc=krisman@collabora.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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