Re: [PATCH 2/2] ceph: switch atomic open to use new fscrypt helper

[Xiubo Li]

On 14/03/2023 02:42, Luís Henriques wrote:
> Eric Biggers <ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 12:33:10PM +0000, Luís Henriques wrote:
> > > Switch ceph atomic open to use fscrypt_prepare_atomic_open().  This fixes
> > > a bug where a dentry is incorrectly set with DCACHE_NOKEY_NAME when 'dir'
> > > has been evicted but the key is still available (for example, where there's
> > > a drop_caches).
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Luís Henriques <lhenriques@xxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >   fs/ceph/file.c | 8 +++-----
> > >   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/ceph/file.c b/fs/ceph/file.c
> > > index dee3b445f415..5ad57cc4c13b 100644
> > > --- a/fs/ceph/file.c
> > > +++ b/fs/ceph/file.c
> > > @@ -795,11 +795,9 @@ int ceph_atomic_open(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry,
> > >   	ihold(dir);
> > >   	if (IS_ENCRYPTED(dir)) {
> > >   		set_bit(CEPH_MDS_R_FSCRYPT_FILE, &req->r_req_flags);
> > > -		if (!fscrypt_has_encryption_key(dir)) {
> > > -			spin_lock(&dentry->d_lock);
> > > -			dentry->d_flags |= DCACHE_NOKEY_NAME;
> > > -			spin_unlock(&dentry->d_lock);
> > > -		}
> > > +		err = fscrypt_prepare_atomic_open(dir, dentry);
> > > +		if (err)
> > > +			goto out_req;
> > Note that this patch does not apply to upstream or even to linux-next.
> True, I should have mentioned that in the cover-letter.  This patch should
> be applied against the 'testing' branch in https://github.com/ceph/ceph-client,
> which is where the ceph fscrypt currently lives.
>
> > I'd be glad to take patch 1 through the fscrypt tree for 6.4.  But I'm wondering
> > what the current plans are for getting ceph's fscrypt support upstream?
> As far as I know, the current plan is to try to merge the ceph code during
> the next merge window for 6.4 (but Xiubo and Ilya may correct me if I'm
> wrong).  Also, regarding who picks which patch, I'm fine with you picking
> the first one.  But I'll let the ceph maintainers say what they think,
> because it may be easier for them to keep both patches together due to the
> testing infrastructure being used.
>
> Anyway, I'll send out a new rev tomorrow taking your comments into
> account.  Thanks, Eric!

Eric, Luis,

It will be fine if Eric could merge patch 1 into the fscrypt tree. Then 
I will merge the patch 1 into the ceph-client's testing by tagging as 
[DO NOT MERGE] to run our tests.

And locally we are still running the test, and there have several fixes 
followed and need more time to review.

Thanks

- Xiubo

> Cheers,

--
Best Regards,

Xiubo Li (李秀波)

Email: xiubli@xxxxxxxxxx/xiubli@xxxxxxx
Slack: @Xiubo Li