On Thu, 2022-03-31 at 20:03 +0000, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 11:30:44AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > static struct fscrypt_operations ceph_fscrypt_ops = {
> > .key_prefix = "ceph:",
> > .get_context = ceph_crypt_get_context,
> > .set_context = ceph_crypt_set_context,
> > .empty_dir = ceph_crypt_empty_dir,
> > + .has_stable_inodes = ceph_crypt_has_stable_inodes,
> > };
>
> What is the use case for implementing this? Note the comment in the struct
> definition:
>
> /*
> * Check whether the filesystem's inode numbers and UUID are stable,
> * meaning that they will never be changed even by offline operations
> * such as filesystem shrinking and therefore can be used in the
> * encryption without the possibility of files becoming unreadable.
> *
> * Filesystems only need to implement this function if they want to
> * support the FSCRYPT_POLICY_FLAG_IV_INO_LBLK_{32,64} flags. These
> * flags are designed to work around the limitations of UFS and eMMC
> * inline crypto hardware, and they shouldn't be used in scenarios where
> * such hardware isn't being used.
> *
> * Leaving this NULL is equivalent to always returning false.
> */
> bool (*has_stable_inodes)(struct super_block *sb);
>
> I think you should just leave this NULL for now.
>
Mostly we were just looking for ways to make all of the -g encrypt
xfstests pass. I'll plan to drop this patch and 07/54. I don't see any
need to support legacy modes or stuff that involves special storage hw.
-
Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
