[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200421184143.GA3004764@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 11:41:43 -0700
From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 3/8] fs/ext4: Disallow encryption if inode is DAX
On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 12:54:34PM -0700, 'Ira Weiny' wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 12:03:07PM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 09:00:25PM -0700, ira.weiny@...el.com wrote:
[snip]
> >
> > Also note that encrypted files are read/write so we must never allow
> > the combination of ENCRPYT_FL and DAX_FL. So that may be something
> > where we should teach __ext4_iget() to check for this, and declare the
> > file system as corrupted if it sees this combination.
>
> ok...
After thinking about this...
Do we really want to declare the FS corrupted?
If so, I think we need to return errors when such a configuration is attempted.
If in the future we have an encrypted mode which can co-exist with DAX (such as
Dan mentioned) we can change this.
FWIW I think we should return errors when such a configuration is attempted but
_not_ declare the FS corrupted. That allows users to enable this configuration
later if we can figure out how to support it.
>
> > (For VERITY_FL
> > && DAX_FL that is a combo that we might want to support in the future,
> > so that's probably a case where arguably, we should just ignore the
> > DAX_FL for now.)
>
> ok...
I think this should work the same.
It looks like VERITY_FL and ENCRYPT_FL are _not_ user modifiable? Is that
correct?
You said that ENCRPYT_FL is set from the parent directory? But I'm not seeing
where that occurs?
Similarly I don't see where VERITY_FL is being set either? :-/
I think to make this work correctly we should restrict setting those flags if
DAX_FL is set and vice versa. But I'm not finding where to do that. :-/
Ira
>
> Ira
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists