Hi Dave, On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 04:45:02PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > fscrypto: clean up include file mess > > From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Filesystems have to include different header files based on whether > they are compiled with encryption support or not. That's nasty and > messy. > > Instead, rationalise the headers so we have a single include > fscrypt.h and let it decide what internal implementation to include > based on the __FS_HAS_ENCRYPTION define. Filesystems set > __FS_HAS_ENCRYPTION before including linux/fscrypt.h if they are > built with encryption support. > > Add guards to prevent fscrypt_supp.h and fscrypt_notsupp.h from > being directly included by filesystems. This looks good; we probably should have done it that way originally. This will allow us to have the inline functions like fscrypt_prepare_rename() defined in fscrypt.h, and then have supp/notsupp versions of __fscrypt_prepare_rename() instead --- so common checks like for IS_ENCRYPTED() will be in one place only. One nit: > +#ifdef CONFIG_EXT4_FS_ENCRYPTION > +#define __FS_HAS_ENCRYPTION 1 > +#endif > +#include <linux/fscrypt.h> How about doing #define __FS_HAS_ENCRYPTION IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EXT4_FS_ENCRYPTION) (and likewise for f2fs and ubifs), then checking '#if __FS_HAS_ENCRYPTION' rather than '#ifdef __FS_HAS_ENCRYPTION'? Eric
