GNU bug report logs - #77203
[PATCH 0/4] gnu: Add fscrypt.

Previous Next

Full log

Message #50 received at 77203 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: 45mg <45mg.writes <at> gmail.com>
To: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>, 45mg <45mg.writes <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 77203 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Wilko Meyer <w <at> wmeyer.eu>,
 Katherine Cox-Buday <cox.katherine.e+guix <at> gmail.com>,
 Sharlatan Hellseher <sharlatanus <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Linux native filesystem encryption (fscrypt).
Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2025 06:44:40 +0000

Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name> writes:

> Great. I've made cosmetic adjustments and pushed to the kernel-updates
> branch:
>
> https://ci.guix.gnu.org/jobset/kernel-updates
>
> It should be build kernels based on these patches for testing.

Great, thanks!

> Looking at the documentation, should we adjust any other options? Or
> will they automatically be adjusted to something sensible?
>
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v6.13/filesystems/fscrypt.html#kernel-config-options

From that page and from the test I described above, it looks like
CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION is the only option that's strictly necessary for
the default encryption mode.

The other options mentioned in the docs seem to be either (1) for using
other encryption modes, or (2) for hardware acceleration, which is
platform-specific. I don't have any need for (1) so I probably won't
look into it in the near future. Once this patch series is merged and I
start relying on fscrypt, I should get an idea of the performance
situation; at that point I might look into (2) if I feel that the
un-accelerated performance isn't good enough.

(In the meantime, of course, anyone else is welcome to look into it.)

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.