On Wednesday, February 20, 2019 2:47:16 AM IST Eric Biggers wrote: > Hi Chandan, > > On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 03:34:23PM +0530, Chandan Rajendra wrote: > > This patchset moves the "post read processing" code into a file of its > > own and gets the generic do_mpage_readpge() to make use of the > > functionality provided. With these changes in place, the patchset > > changes Ext4 to use mpage_readpage[s] instead of its own custom > > ext4_readpages() function. This is done to reduce duplicity of code > > across filesystems. Based on the reviews provided for this patchset, I > > will change F2FS to use mpage_readpage[s] and post the next version of > > this patchset to linux-fsdevel mailing list. > > > > The patchset also includes patches from previous postings i.e. > > patches to replace per-filesystem encryption config options with a > > single config option that affects all filesystems making use of > > fscrypt code. > > > > Chandan Rajendra (10): > > ext4: use IS_ENCRYPTED() to check encryption status > > f2fs: use IS_ENCRYPTED() to check encryption status > > fscrypt: remove filesystem specific build config option > > Consolidate "post read processing" into a new file > > fsverity: Add call back to decide if verity check has to be performed > > Introduce REQ_POST_READ_PROC bio flag > > fsverity: Add call back to determine readpage limit > > fsverity: Add call back to verify file holes > > fs/mpage.c: Integrate post read processing > > ext4: Wire up ext4_readpage[s] to use mpage_readpage[s] > > > > Thanks for working on this! This will also make it much easier to support > block_size != PAGE_SIZE in ext4 encryption, right? I think this is the best > path forward, but I'll take a closer look at your new patches. > > FYI regarding practical matters, merging fs-verity was delayed due to > disagreement about the API. See https://lwn.net/Articles/775872/. > > We don't have to wait for fs-verity for your initial fscrypt changes, though: > > ext4: use IS_ENCRYPTED() to check encryption status > f2fs: use IS_ENCRYPTED() to check encryption status > fscrypt: remove filesystem specific build config option > > So, a couple weeks ago Ted and I already queued those three patches in > fscrypt.git (https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tytso/fscrypt.git > branch "master", though we plan to change the repo soon) for the upcoming merge > window, based on upstream rather than fs-verity. Are you fine with that? Yes, the changes looks good. Thanks for queueing them up. > > I also suggest adding linux-fsdevel to the Cc given the fs/*.c changes. Yes, I will do that. > > Thanks! > > - Eric > > -- chandan
