On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 2:26 AM Chao Yu wrote:
>
> On 2019/10/24 5:48, Hridya Valsaraju wrote:
> > Currently f2fs stats are only available from /d/f2fs/status. This patch
> > adds some of the f2fs stats to sysfs so that they are accessible even
> > when debugfs is not mounted.
>
> Why don't we mou
Hello,
In preparation for adding inline encryption support to fscrypt, this
patchset adds a new fscrypt policy flag which modifies the encryption to
be optimized for inline encryption hardware compliant with the UFS v2.1
standard or the upcoming version of the eMMC standard.
This means using per-
From: Eric Biggers
IV_INO_LBLK_64 encryption policies have special requirements from the
filesystem beyond those of the existing encryption policies:
- Inode numbers must never change, even if the filesystem is resized.
- Inode numbers must be <= 32 bits.
- File logical block numbers must be <=
From: Eric Biggers
f2fs inode numbers are stable across filesystem resizing, and f2fs inode
and file logical block numbers are always 32-bit. So f2fs can always
support IV_INO_LBLK_64 encryption policies. Wire up the needed
fscrypt_operations to declare support.
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers
--
From: Eric Biggers
Inline encryption hardware compliant with the UFS v2.1 standard or with
the upcoming version of the eMMC standard has the following properties:
(1) Per I/O request, the encryption key is specified by a previously
loaded keyslot. There might be only a small number of keysl
From: Eric Biggers
Skip the O_DIRECT tests on f2fs when the test_dummy_encryption mount
option is given, for the same reason as given for ext4 in
commit 9b154b26e4a1 ("common/rc: ext4 doesn't support O_DIRECT with
encryption").
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers
---
common/rc | 9 ++---
1 file ch
On Thu, 2019-10-24 at 17:12 +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> [External]
>
> On 2019/10/23 22:02, Ardelean, Alexandru wrote:
> > Seems to have been introduced via:
> >
> >
> >
> > commit 780de47cf6cb5f524cd98ec8ffbffc3da5696e17
> > Author: C
On Thu, 24 Oct 2019 at 00:04, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> I think not making it crazy verbose is a helpful, but at the same time
> it should be somewhat descriptive.
What would your suggested name be?
___
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@
On 2019/10/23 1:09, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On 10/22, Chao Yu wrote:
>> On 2019/10/18 14:37, Shin'ichiro Kawasaki wrote:
>>> Fsck checks fsync data when UMOUNT flag is not set. When the f2fs was not
>>> cleanly unmouted, UMOUNT flag is not recorded in meta data and fsync data
>>> can be left in the f2
On 2019/10/24 5:48, Hridya Valsaraju wrote:
> Currently f2fs stats are only available from /d/f2fs/status. This patch
> adds some of the f2fs stats to sysfs so that they are accessible even
> when debugfs is not mounted.
Why don't we mount debugfs first?
Thanks,
On 2019/10/24 5:48, Hridya Valsaraju wrote:
> This patch merges the sysfs node documentation present in
> Documentation/filesystems/f2fs.txt and
> Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-fs-f2fs
> and deletes the duplicate information from
> Documentation/filesystems/f2fs.txt. This is to prevent having to
On 2019/10/23 22:02, Ardelean, Alexandru wrote:
> Seems to have been introduced via:
>
>
>
> commit 780de47cf6cb5f524cd98ec8ffbffc3da5696e17
> Author: Chao Yu
> Date: Tue Mar 20 23:08:30 2018 +0800
>
> f2fs: don't track new
Hi Ju Hyung,
On 2019/10/23 1:53, Ju Hyung Park wrote:
> Hi Jaegeuk and Chao,
>
> Nice to see this finally getting into shape :) Great work
> I'm excited to see possible use-cases for this in the future.
>
> Would f2fs compress files automatically like how btrfs' "compress" option
> works?
> Or
Hi Jaegeuk,
On 2019/10/23 1:16, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> This patch supports 2MB-aligned pinned file, which can guarantee no GC at all
> by allocating fully valid 2MB segment.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim
> ---
> fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 4 +++-
> fs/f2fs/file.c | 39
On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 07:44:59PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> Would you be happy with something that more directly describes the change the
> flag makes
Yes.
> , like FSCRYPT_POLICY_FLAG_CONTENTS_IV_INO_LBLK_64? I.e., the IVs for
> contents encryption are 64-bit and contain the inode and logic
15 matches
Mail list logo