On Tue, Aug 08, 2023 at 01:08:17PM -0400, Sweet Tea Dorminy wrote: > This changeset adds extent-based data encryption to fscrypt. > Some filesystems need to encrypt data based on extents, rather than on > inodes, due to features incompatible with inode-based encryption. For > instance, btrfs can have multiple inodes referencing a single block of > data, and moves logical data blocks to different physical locations on > disk in the background. > > As per discussion last year in [1] and later in [2], we would like to > allow the use of fscrypt with btrfs, with authenticated encryption. This > is the first step of that work, adding extent-based encryption to > fscrypt; authenticated encryption is the next step. Extent-based > encryption should be usable by other filesystems which wish to support > snapshotting or background data rearrangement also, but btrfs is the > first user. > > This changeset requires extent encryption to use inlinecrypt, as > discussed previously. > > This applies atop [3], which itself is based on kdave/misc-next. It > passes encryption fstests with suitable changes to btrfs-progs. > > Changelog: > v3: > - Added four additional changes: > - soft-deleting keys that extent infos might later need to use, so > the behavior of an open file after key removal matches inode-based > fscrypt. > - a set of changes to allow asynchronous info freeing for extents, > necessary due to locking constraints in btrfs. > > v2: > - https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fscrypt/cover.1688927487.git.sweettea-kernel@xxxxxxxxxx/T/#t > > > [1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1janjxewlewtVPqctkWOjSa7OhCgB8Gdx7iDaCDQQNZA/edit?usp=sharing > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fscrypt/80496cfe-161d-fb0d-8230-93818b966b1b@xxxxxxxxxx/T/#t > [3] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fscrypt/cover.1691505830.git.sweettea-kernel@xxxxxxxxxx/ > Other than the patches I had comments about this series looks good to me. You can add Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <josef@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> to the series once you've cleaned up my other comments. Eric I did my best to try and review these in the context of all the code, I've gone and looked at how it ties into the btrfs stuff and I've looked at the final state of the code, it looks good to me, but clearly I don't have the experience in this code that Sweet Tea or you have. Thanks, Josef
|