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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 15 May 2020 07:42:24 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> To: Satya Tangirala <satyat@...gle.com> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>, linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, Barani Muthukumaran <bmuthuku@....qualcomm.com>, Kuohong Wang <kuohong.wang@...iatek.com>, Kim Boojin <boojin.kim@...sung.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 00/12] Inline Encryption Support On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 12:25:40PM +0000, Satya Tangirala wrote: > One of the nice things about the current design is that regardless of what > request queue an FS sends an encrypted bio to, blk-crypto will be able to handle > the encryption (whether by using hardware inline encryption, or using the > blk-crypto-fallback). The FS itself does not need to worry about what the > request queue is. True. Which just makes me despise that design with the pointless fallback even more..
Powered by blists - more mailing lists