Re: [PATCH 1/2] ubifs: Remove #ifdef around CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION

[Eric Biggers <ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 08:49:18AM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Eric,
> 
> ----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
> > Von: "Eric Biggers" <ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > An: "Sascha Hauer" <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "richard" <richard@xxxxxx>
> > CC: "linux-mtd" <linux-mtd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-fscrypt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "tytso" <tytso@xxxxxxx>, "kernel"
> > <kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 8. Mai 2019 05:19:55
> > Betreff: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ubifs: Remove #ifdef around CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION
> 
> > On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 08:52:31AM +0100, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> >> ifdefs reduce readablity and compile coverage. This removes the ifdefs
> >> around CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION by using IS_ENABLED and relying on static
> >> inline wrappers. A new static inline wrapper for setting sb->s_cop is
> >> introduced to allow filesystems to unconditionally compile in their
> >> s_cop operations.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >>  fs/ubifs/ioctl.c        | 11 +----------
> >>  fs/ubifs/sb.c           |  7 ++++---
> >>  fs/ubifs/super.c        |  4 +---
> >>  include/linux/fscrypt.h | 11 +++++++++++
> >>  4 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> >> 
> >> diff --git a/fs/ubifs/ioctl.c b/fs/ubifs/ioctl.c
> >> index 82e4e6a30b04..6b05b3ec500e 100644
> >> --- a/fs/ubifs/ioctl.c
> >> +++ b/fs/ubifs/ioctl.c
> >> @@ -193,7 +193,6 @@ long ubifs_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd,
> >> unsigned long arg)
> >>  		return err;
> >>  	}
> >>  	case FS_IOC_SET_ENCRYPTION_POLICY: {
> >> -#ifdef CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION
> >>  		struct ubifs_info *c = inode->i_sb->s_fs_info;
> >>  
> >>  		err = ubifs_enable_encryption(c);
> >> @@ -201,17 +200,9 @@ long ubifs_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd,
> >> unsigned long arg)
> >>  			return err;
> >>  
> >>  		return fscrypt_ioctl_set_policy(file, (const void __user *)arg);
> >> -#else
> >> -		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> >> -#endif
> >>  	}
> >> -	case FS_IOC_GET_ENCRYPTION_POLICY: {
> >> -#ifdef CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION
> >> +	case FS_IOC_GET_ENCRYPTION_POLICY:
> >>  		return fscrypt_ioctl_get_policy(file, (void __user *)arg);
> >> -#else
> >> -		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> >> -#endif
> >> -	}
> >>  
> >>  	default:
> >>  		return -ENOTTY;
> >> diff --git a/fs/ubifs/sb.c b/fs/ubifs/sb.c
> >> index 67fac1e8adfb..2afc8b1d4c3b 100644
> >> --- a/fs/ubifs/sb.c
> >> +++ b/fs/ubifs/sb.c
> >> @@ -748,14 +748,12 @@ int ubifs_read_superblock(struct ubifs_info *c)
> >>  		goto out;
> >>  	}
> >>  
> >> -#ifndef CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION
> >> -	if (c->encrypted) {
> >> +	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_UBIFS_FS_ENCRYPTION) && c->encrypted) {
> >>  		ubifs_err(c, "file system contains encrypted files but UBIFS"
> >>  			     " was built without crypto support.");
> >>  		err = -EINVAL;
> >>  		goto out;
> >>  	}
> > 
> > A bit late, but I noticed this in ubifs/linux-next.  This needs to use
> > CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION here, not CONFIG_UBIFS_FS_ENCRYPTION, as the latter no
> > longer exists.
> 
> Thanks for spotting. I'll fit it myself in -next.
> 
> Thanks,
> //richard

This was merged to mainline and it's still broken.  This breaks UBIFS encryption
entirely, BTW.  Do you not run xfstests before sending pull requests?

- Eric

______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/