Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 4 Jun 2021 17:15:23 -0700
From:   Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
To:     Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>
Cc:     Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Rosenberg <drosen@google.com>,
        linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@collabora.com>,
        kernel-team@android.com, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] f2fs: Advertise encrypted casefolding in sysfs
Message-ID: <YLrCG/3e0xPE9P84@google.com>
References: <20210603095038.314949-1-drosen@google.com>
 <20210603095038.314949-3-drosen@google.com>
 <YLlj+h4RiT6FvyK6@sol.localdomain>
 <YLmv5Ykb3QUzDOlL@google.com>
 <YLmzkzPZwBVYf5LO@sol.localdomain>
 <YLm8aOs6Sc/CLaAv@google.com>
 <452273b4-b386-3180-9b6e-f060bdbe3802@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <452273b4-b386-3180-9b6e-f060bdbe3802@kernel.org>
Precedence: bulk

On 06/05, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2021/6/4 13:38, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > On 06/03, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 09:45:25PM -0700, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > > > On 06/03, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 09:50:38AM +0000, Daniel Rosenberg wrote:
> > > > > > Older kernels don't support encryption with casefolding. This adds
> > > > > > the sysfs entry encrypted_casefold to show support for those combined
> > > > > > features. Support for this feature was originally added by
> > > > > > commit 7ad08a58bf67 ("f2fs: Handle casefolding with Encryption")
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Fixes: 7ad08a58bf67 ("f2fs: Handle casefolding with Encryption")
> > > > > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v5.11+
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Rosenberg <drosen@google.com>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > >   fs/f2fs/sysfs.c | 15 +++++++++++++--
> > > > > >   1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c b/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
> > > > > > index 09e3f258eb52..6604291a3cdf 100644
> > > > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
> > > > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/sysfs.c
> > > > > > @@ -161,6 +161,9 @@ static ssize_t features_show(struct f2fs_attr *a,
> > > > > >   	if (f2fs_sb_has_compression(sbi))
> > > > > >   		len += scnprintf(buf + len, PAGE_SIZE - len, "%s%s",
> > > > > >   				len ? ", " : "", "compression");
> > > > > > +	if (f2fs_sb_has_casefold(sbi) && f2fs_sb_has_encrypt(sbi))
> > > > > > +		len += scnprintf(buf + len, PAGE_SIZE - len, "%s%s",
> > > > > > +				len ? ", " : "", "encrypted_casefold");
> > > > > >   	len += scnprintf(buf + len, PAGE_SIZE - len, "%s%s",
> > > > > >   				len ? ", " : "", "pin_file");
> > > > > >   	len += scnprintf(buf + len, PAGE_SIZE - len, "\n");
> > > > > > @@ -579,6 +582,7 @@ enum feat_id {
> > > > > >   	FEAT_CASEFOLD,
> > > > > >   	FEAT_COMPRESSION,
> > > > > >   	FEAT_TEST_DUMMY_ENCRYPTION_V2,
> > > > > > +	FEAT_ENCRYPTED_CASEFOLD,
> > > > > >   };
> > > > > 
> > > > > Actually looking at it more closely, this patch is wrong.
> > > > > 
> > > > > It only makes sense to declare "encrypted_casefold" as a feature of the
> > > > > filesystem implementation, i.e. /sys/fs/f2fs/features/encrypted_casefold.
> > > > > 
> > > > > It does *not* make sense to declare it as a feature of a particular filesystem
> > > > > instance, i.e. /sys/fs/f2fs/$disk/features, as it is already implied by the
> > > > > filesystem instance having both the encryption and casefold features enabled.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Can we add /sys/fs/f2fs/features/encrypted_casefold only?
> > > > 
> > > > wait.. /sys/fs/f2fs/features/encrypted_casefold is on by
> > > > CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION && CONFIG_UNICODE.
> > > > OTOH, /sys/fs/f2fs/$dis/feature_list/encrypted_casefold is on by
> > > > on-disk features: F2FS_FEATURE_ENCRYPT and F2FS_FEATURE_CASEFOLD.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Yes, but in the on-disk case, encrypted_casefold is redundant because it simply
> > > means encrypt && casefold.  There is no encrypted_casefold flag on-disk.
> > 
> > I prefer to keep encrypted_casefold likewise kernel feature, which is more
> > intuitive to users.
> 
> encrypted_casefold is a kernel feature support flag, not a disk one, IMO, it's
> not needed to add it in to per-disk feature list, it may mislead user that
> compatible encrypted casefold needs a extra disk layout support while disk has
> already encrypted and casefold feature enabled.

Yeah, I overlooked, and per Ted and Daniel's comments, I already removed it
locally, but couldn't post it yet. :P

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> > 
> > > 
> > > - Eric