linux-ext4 - Re: [RFC PATCH 8/8] ext4: enable encryption for blocksize less than page size

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <4623372.lWF4DCE0j7@localhost.localdomain>
Date:   Wed, 17 Jan 2018 19:12:46 +0530
From:   Chandan Rajendra <chandan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        tytso@....edu
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 8/8] ext4: enable encryption for blocksize less than page size

On Wednesday, January 17, 2018 8:10:04 AM IST Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 07:41:29PM +0530, Chandan Rajendra wrote:
> > Now that we have all the code to support encryption for block size less
> > than page size scenario, this commit removes the conditional check in
> > filesystem mount code.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Chandan Rajendra <chandan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > ---
> >  fs/ext4/super.c | 9 +--------
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 8 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/ext4/super.c b/fs/ext4/super.c
> > index ebb7edb..5a52c98 100644
> > --- a/fs/ext4/super.c
> > +++ b/fs/ext4/super.c
> > @@ -4138,14 +4138,7 @@ static int ext4_fill_super(struct super_block *sb, void *data, int silent)
> >  		}
> >  	}
> >  
> > -	if ((DUMMY_ENCRYPTION_ENABLED(sbi) || ext4_has_feature_encrypt(sb)) &&
> > -	    (blocksize != PAGE_SIZE)) {
> > -		ext4_msg(sb, KERN_ERR,
> > -			 "Unsupported blocksize for fs encryption");
> > -		goto failed_mount_wq;
> > -	}
> > -
> > -	if (DUMMY_ENCRYPTION_ENABLED(sbi) && !sb_rdonly(sb) &&
> > +	if (DUMMY_ENCRYPTION_ENABLED(sbi) && !(sb->s_flags & MS_RDONLY) &&
> >  	    !ext4_has_feature_encrypt(sb)) {
> >  		ext4_set_feature_encrypt(sb);
> >  		ext4_commit_super(sb, 1);
> 
> Why change sb_rdonly() to 'sb->s_flags & MS_RDONLY'?
> 

I am sorry, I messed up this one when rebasing the patchset onto the 
latest linux-next. . The old code base had 'sb->s_flags & MS_RDONLY'.
I will fix this up in the next version of this patchset.

-- 
chandan