Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
Date:   Mon, 2 May 2022 19:56:36 +0530
From:   Ritesh Harjani <ritesh.list@gmail.com>
To:     Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
Cc:     linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
        Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/6] ext4: Move out crypto ops to ext4_crypto.c
Message-ID: <20220502142636.ud46y4bwr76g5emn@riteshh-domain>
References: <cover.1650517532.git.ritesh.list@gmail.com>
 <Ym40Tx0W8Mvk8XOg@sol.localdomain>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Ym40Tx0W8Mvk8XOg@sol.localdomain>
Precedence: bulk

On 22/05/01 12:18AM, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 10:53:16AM +0530, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > This is 1st in the series to cleanup ext4/super.c, since it has grown quite large.
> > This moves out crypto related ops and few definitions to fs/ext4/ext4_crypto.c
> >
> > Testing
> > =========
> > 1. Tested "-g encrypt" with default configs.
> > 2. Compiled tested on x86 & Power.
> >
> >
> > Ritesh Harjani (6):
> >   fscrypt: Provide definition of fscrypt_set_test_dummy_encryption
> >   ext4: Move ext4 crypto code to its own file ext4_crypto.c
> >   ext4: Directly opencode ext4_set_test_dummy_encryption
> >   ext4: Cleanup function defs from ext4.h into ext4_crypto.c
> >   ext4: Move all encryption related into a common #ifdef
> >   ext4: Use provided macro for checking dummy_enc_policy
>
> FYI, the patchset
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-ext4/20220501050857.538984-1-ebiggers@kernel.org
> I just sent out cleans up how the test_dummy_encryption mount option is handled.
> It would supersede patches 1, 3, 5, and 6 of this series (since those all only
> deal with test_dummy_encryption-related code).

Sure got it.

>
> To avoid conflicting changes, maybe you should just focus on your patches 2 and
> 4 for now, along with possibly FS_IOC_GET_ENCRYPTION_PWSALT as I mentioned?
> There shouldn't be any overlap that way.

Yes, agreed with al of above points Eric. Will make the changes and send a new
revision.

-ritesh