On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 09:30:01AM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > > An alternative which would work nicely on ext4 and xfs (if xfs supported > > fscrypt) would be to pass the physical block number as the DUN. However, that > > wouldn't work at all on f2fs because f2fs moves data blocks around. And since > > most people who want to use this are using f2fs, f2fs support is essential. > > And that is something fscrypt supports already, so if people really > did want to use 64-bit logical block numbers, they could do that, at > the cost of giving up the ability to shrink the file system (which XFS > doesn't support anyway....) I was talking about the physical block number (offset from the start of the filesystem -- ext4_fsblk_t on ext4), not the file logical block number (offset in the file data -- ext4_lblk_t on ext4). fscrypt doesn't currently support using the physical block number. - Eric
