[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <79c00da2-0840-a94f-a9cd-d571b8ad4cad@nod.at>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2016 13:01:02 +0100
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
dedekind1@...il.com, adrian.hunter@...el.com, jaegeuk@...nel.org,
david@...ma-star.at, wd@...x.de, sbabic@...x.de,
dengler@...utronix.de, ebiggers@...gle.com, mhalcrow@...gle.com,
hch@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/29] UBIFS File Encryption v1
Ted,
On 14.11.2016 04:05, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> Richard,
>
> Your fscrypt patches look good. I've created an fscrypt branch on the
> ext4.git tree which contains your changes as well as Eric Bigger's
> recent fspatch cleanups changes. If you want to base your ubifs
> changes on that branch, that would be great. The ext4 dev branch will
> be including that fscrypt branch, so it will be feeding into
> linux-next that way. If you also base your patches on that, it will
> avoid duplicate patches in linux-next and in Linus's tree when he
> pulls them.
Will do!
> One quick question. When ubifs uses subpage blocks, can you assume that
> they are always powers of two? Or more to the point, can you assume
> that it will always be a multiple of the cipher's blocksize?
Yes, UBIFS takes care about that. Subpage blocks are always a multiple of
FS_CRYPTO_BLOCK_SIZE.
Thanks,
//richard
Powered by blists - more mailing lists