The filesystem level encryption support, currently used by ext4 and f2fs
and proposed for ubifs, does not yet have a dedicated mailing list.
Since no mailing lists were specified in MAINTAINERS, get_maintainer.pl
only recommended to send patches directly to the maintainers and to
linux-kernel. This patch adds linux-fsdevel as the preferred mailing
list for fscrypto patches for the time being.
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <[email protected]>
---
MAINTAINERS | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
index ea4fbc9..d3ce20e 100644
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@ -5123,6 +5123,7 @@ F: include/linux/fscache*.h
FS-CRYPTO: FILE SYSTEM LEVEL ENCRYPTION SUPPORT
M: Theodore Y. Ts'o <[email protected]>
M: Jaegeuk Kim <[email protected]>
+L: [email protected]
S: Supported
F: fs/crypto/
F: include/linux/fscrypto.h
--
2.8.0.rc3.226.g39d4020
On 24.10.2016 22:29, Eric Biggers wrote:
> The filesystem level encryption support, currently used by ext4 and f2fs
> and proposed for ubifs, does not yet have a dedicated mailing list.
> Since no mailing lists were specified in MAINTAINERS, get_maintainer.pl
> only recommended to send patches directly to the maintainers and to
> linux-kernel. This patch adds linux-fsdevel as the preferred mailing
> list for fscrypto patches for the time being.
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <[email protected]>
> ---
> MAINTAINERS | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> index ea4fbc9..d3ce20e 100644
> --- a/MAINTAINERS
> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> @@ -5123,6 +5123,7 @@ F: include/linux/fscache*.h
> FS-CRYPTO: FILE SYSTEM LEVEL ENCRYPTION SUPPORT
> M: Theodore Y. Ts'o <[email protected]>
> M: Jaegeuk Kim <[email protected]>
> +L: [email protected]
> S: Supported
> F: fs/crypto/
> F: include/linux/fscrypto.h
That's a very good idea!
Do we also have designated git tree for fscrypto?
As soon UBIFS file encryption is mainline I'll have to monitor changes
to fscrypto very closely because changes in fscrypto could introduce
changes in the on-flash format of UBIFS.
i.e. a subtle change in filename encryption... :-)
Thanks,
//richard
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Command Line: Reinvented for Modern Developers
Did the resurgence of CLI tooling catch you by surprise?
Reconnect with the command line and become more productive.
Learn the new .NET and ASP.NET CLI. Get your free copy!
http://sdm.link/telerik
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 10:44:41PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> That's a very good idea!
> Do we also have designated git tree for fscrypto?
> As soon UBIFS file encryption is mainline I'll have to monitor changes
> to fscrypto very closely because changes in fscrypto could introduce
> changes in the on-flash format of UBIFS.
> i.e. a subtle change in filename encryption... :-)
There isn't yet a dedicated fscrypto tree. Ted has been taking in most of my
fscrypto patches through the ext4 tree.
This was discussed briefly before, but as designed filesystems do not need to be
aware of the format of the xattr (fscrypt_context) or the format of the
encrypted data per se. Thus, new modes/formats can be introduced without
requiring changes to filesystem-specific code. The point that was brought up is
whether some filesystems would additionally like to track in their superblock
which encryption modes and flags are used and either deny mounts or warn at
mount-time if some are unrecognized. So it should be decided soon if UBIFS is
going to do that or not.
Eric
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 01:29:15PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> The filesystem level encryption support, currently used by ext4 and f2fs
> and proposed for ubifs, does not yet have a dedicated mailing list.
> Since no mailing lists were specified in MAINTAINERS, get_maintainer.pl
> only recommended to send patches directly to the maintainers and to
> linux-kernel. This patch adds linux-fsdevel as the preferred mailing
> list for fscrypto patches for the time being.
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <[email protected]>
Thanks, applied.
- Ted