[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201021044423.GB3939@sol.localdomain>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 21:44:23 -0700
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Satya Tangirala <satyat@...gle.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
dm-devel@...hat.com, Alasdair Kergon <agk@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] block: keyslot-manager: Introduce passthrough
keyslot manager
On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 08:20:44AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> And this just validates my argument that calling the inline crypto work
> directly from the block layer instead of just down below in blk-mq was
> wrong. We should not require any support from stacking drivers at the
> keyslot manager level.
I'm not sure what you're referring to here; could you clarify?
It's true that device-mapper devices don't need the actual keyslot management.
But they do need the ability to expose crypto capabilities as well as a key
eviction function. And those are currently handled by
"struct blk_keyslot_manager". Hence the need for a "passthrough keyslot
manager" that does those other things but not the actual keyslot management.
FWIW, I suggested splitting these up, but you disagreed and said you wanted the
crypto capabilities to remain part of the blk_keyslot_manager
(https://lkml.kernel.org/linux-block/20200327170047.GA24682@infradead.org/).
If you've now changed your mind, please be clear about it.
- Eric
Powered by blists - more mailing lists