linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 0/9] ensure bios aren't split in middle of crypto data unit

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Sat, 24 Jul 2021 08:36:52 +0100
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Satya Tangirala <satyaprateek2357@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/9] ensure bios aren't split in middle of crypto data
 unit

On Tue, Jul 06, 2021 at 10:29:34PM -0700, Satya Tangirala wrote:
> When a bio has an encryption context, its size must be aligned to its
> crypto data unit size. A bio must not be split in the middle of a data
> unit. Currently, bios are split at logical block boundaries, but a crypto
> data unit size might be larger than the logical block size - e.g. a machine
> could be using fscrypt (which uses 4K crypto data units) with an eMMC block
> device with inline encryption hardware that has a logical block size of 512
> bytes.
> 
> Right now, the only user of blk-crypto is fscrypt (on ext4 and f2fs), which
> (currently) only submits bios where the size of each segment is a multiple
> of data_unit_size.  That happens to avoid most of the cases where bios
> could be split in the middle of a data unit.  However, when support for
> direct I/O on encrypted files is added, or when support for filesystem
> metadata encryption is added, it will be possible for bios to have segment
> lengths that are multiples of the logical block size, but not multiples of
> the crypto data unit size.  So the block layer needs to start handling this
> case appropriately.

I'm still not sold on this case yet.  sector size aligned I/O is an
optional feature, and I don't think it is worth this overhead.  And
while file systems metadata can be smaller than the file system block
size in a few cases (e.g. XFS log writes), that is usually an extra
performance optimization and can be trivially disabled in mkfs.