| Message ID | 20221027030021.296548-1-xiubli@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v2] encrypt: add ceph support | expand |
On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 11:00:21AM +0800, xiubli@redhat.com wrote: > From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> > > Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> > --- > common/encrypt | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/common/encrypt b/common/encrypt > index 45ce0954..1a77e23b 100644 > --- a/common/encrypt > +++ b/common/encrypt > @@ -153,6 +153,9 @@ _scratch_mkfs_encrypted() > # erase the UBI volume; reformated automatically on next mount > $UBIUPDATEVOL_PROG ${SCRATCH_DEV} -t > ;; > + ceph) > + _scratch_cleanup_files > + ;; Any commits about that? Sorry I'm not familar with cephfs, is this patch enough to help ceph to test encrypted ceph? Due to you tried to do some "checking" job last time. Can "./check -g encrypt" work on ceph? May you paste this test result to help to review? And welcome review points from ceph list. Thanks, Zorro [1] $ grep -rsn _scratch_mkfs_encrypted tests/generic/ tests/generic/395:22:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full tests/generic/396:21:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full tests/generic/580:23:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full tests/generic/581:36:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full tests/generic/595:35:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full tests/generic/613:29:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full tests/generic/621:57:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full tests/generic/429:36:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full tests/generic/397:28:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full tests/generic/398:28:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full tests/generic/421:24:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full tests/generic/440:29:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full tests/generic/419:29:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full tests/generic/435:33:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full tests/generic/593:24:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full tests/generic/576:34:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted_verity &>> $seqres.full > *) > _notrun "No encryption support for $FSTYP" > ;; > -- > 2.31.1 >
On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 11:20:23AM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote: > On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 11:00:21AM +0800, xiubli@redhat.com wrote: > > From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> > > > > Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> > > --- > > common/encrypt | 3 +++ > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/common/encrypt b/common/encrypt > > index 45ce0954..1a77e23b 100644 > > --- a/common/encrypt > > +++ b/common/encrypt > > @@ -153,6 +153,9 @@ _scratch_mkfs_encrypted() > > # erase the UBI volume; reformated automatically on next mount > > $UBIUPDATEVOL_PROG ${SCRATCH_DEV} -t > > ;; > > + ceph) > > + _scratch_cleanup_files > > + ;; > > Any commits about that? > > Sorry I'm not familar with cephfs, is this patch enough to help ceph to test > encrypted ceph? Due to you tried to do some "checking" job last time. > > Can "./check -g encrypt" work on ceph? May you paste this test result to help > to review? And welcome review points from ceph list. I think Xiubo's patch is likely to be required for enabling encryption testing in ceph. Simply doing a '_scratch_cleanup_files' is exactly what network filesystems are doing on _scratch_mkfs(). Thus it makes sense for ceph to do the same for testing fscrypt support, as we don't really have an 'mkfs.ceph' tool. Now, this patch alone is probably not enough to allow to do all the validation we're looking for. (But note that I did *not* tried it myself, so I may be wrong.) I think we'll need to go through each of the 'encrypt' tests, run it in ceph and see if they are really testing what they are supposed to. But that's just my two cents ;-) Cheers, -- Luís > > Thanks, > Zorro > > [1] > $ grep -rsn _scratch_mkfs_encrypted tests/generic/ > tests/generic/395:22:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/396:21:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/580:23:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/581:36:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/595:35:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/613:29:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/621:57:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/429:36:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/397:28:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/398:28:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/421:24:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/440:29:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/419:29:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/435:33:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/593:24:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/576:34:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted_verity &>> $seqres.full > > > *) > > _notrun "No encryption support for $FSTYP" > > ;; > > -- > > 2.31.1 > > >
On 27/10/2022 17:35, Luís Henriques wrote: > On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 11:20:23AM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 11:00:21AM +0800, xiubli@redhat.com wrote: >>> From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> >>> --- >>> common/encrypt | 3 +++ >>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/common/encrypt b/common/encrypt >>> index 45ce0954..1a77e23b 100644 >>> --- a/common/encrypt >>> +++ b/common/encrypt >>> @@ -153,6 +153,9 @@ _scratch_mkfs_encrypted() >>> # erase the UBI volume; reformated automatically on next mount >>> $UBIUPDATEVOL_PROG ${SCRATCH_DEV} -t >>> ;; >>> + ceph) >>> + _scratch_cleanup_files >>> + ;; >> Any commits about that? After I sent it out I found I forgot to add it. Should I send V3 for it ? >> Sorry I'm not familar with cephfs, is this patch enough to help ceph to test >> encrypted ceph? Due to you tried to do some "checking" job last time. >> >> Can "./check -g encrypt" work on ceph? May you paste this test result to help >> to review? And welcome review points from ceph list. > I think Xiubo's patch is likely to be required for enabling encryption > testing in ceph. Simply doing a '_scratch_cleanup_files' is exactly what > network filesystems are doing on _scratch_mkfs(). Thus it makes sense for > ceph to do the same for testing fscrypt support, as we don't really have > an 'mkfs.ceph' tool. > > Now, this patch alone is probably not enough to allow to do all the > validation we're looking for. (But note that I did *not* tried it myself, > so I may be wrong.) I think we'll need to go through each of the > 'encrypt' tests, run it in ceph and see if they are really testing what > they are supposed to. > > But that's just my two cents ;-) This is my test output locally: [root@lxbceph1 xfstests-dev]# ./check -g encrypt FSTYP -- ceph PLATFORM -- Linux/x86_64 lxbceph1 6.1.0-rc1+ #164 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Mon Oct 24 10:18:33 CST 2022 MKFS_OPTIONS -- 10.72.47.117:40267:/testB MOUNT_OPTIONS -- -o name=admin,nowsync,copyfrom,rasize=4096 -o context=system_u:object_r:root_t:s0 10.72.47.117:40267:/testB /mnt/kcephfs.B generic/395 187s ... 224s generic/396 164s ... 219s generic/397 177s ... 226s generic/398 [not run] kernel doesn't support renameat2 syscall generic/399 [not run] Filesystem ceph not supported in _scratch_mkfs_sized_encrypted generic/419 [not run] kernel doesn't support renameat2 syscall generic/421 170s ... 219s generic/429 179s ... 237s generic/435 ... Not finished yet. From my previous test only 395,396,397,421,429,440,593,595,598 test case will pass and all the other will be skipped like the 398,399,419 above. Before this patch or my V1 patches, all the test cases will be skipped. Thanks! - Xiubo > Cheers, > -- > Luís > >> Thanks, >> Zorro >> >> [1] >> $ grep -rsn _scratch_mkfs_encrypted tests/generic/ >> tests/generic/395:22:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >> tests/generic/396:21:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >> tests/generic/580:23:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >> tests/generic/581:36:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >> tests/generic/595:35:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >> tests/generic/613:29:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >> tests/generic/621:57:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >> tests/generic/429:36:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >> tests/generic/397:28:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >> tests/generic/398:28:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >> tests/generic/421:24:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >> tests/generic/440:29:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >> tests/generic/419:29:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >> tests/generic/435:33:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >> tests/generic/593:24:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >> tests/generic/576:34:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted_verity &>> $seqres.full >> >>> *) >>> _notrun "No encryption support for $FSTYP" >>> ;; >>> -- >>> 2.31.1 >>>
On 27/10/2022 11:20, Zorro Lang wrote: > On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 11:00:21AM +0800, xiubli@redhat.com wrote: >> From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> >> >> Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> >> --- >> common/encrypt | 3 +++ >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/common/encrypt b/common/encrypt >> index 45ce0954..1a77e23b 100644 >> --- a/common/encrypt >> +++ b/common/encrypt >> @@ -153,6 +153,9 @@ _scratch_mkfs_encrypted() >> # erase the UBI volume; reformated automatically on next mount >> $UBIUPDATEVOL_PROG ${SCRATCH_DEV} -t >> ;; >> + ceph) >> + _scratch_cleanup_files Here I just skip ceph and it is enough. Because the _require_scratch_encryption() will do the same thing as I did in my V1's 2/2 patch. - Xiubo >> + ;; > Any commits about that? > > Sorry I'm not familar with cephfs, is this patch enough to help ceph to test > encrypted ceph? Due to you tried to do some "checking" job last time. > > Can "./check -g encrypt" work on ceph? May you paste this test result to help > to review? And welcome review points from ceph list. > > Thanks, > Zorro > > [1] > $ grep -rsn _scratch_mkfs_encrypted tests/generic/ > tests/generic/395:22:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/396:21:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/580:23:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/581:36:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/595:35:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/613:29:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/621:57:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/429:36:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/397:28:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/398:28:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/421:24:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/440:29:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/419:29:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/435:33:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/593:24:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > tests/generic/576:34:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted_verity &>> $seqres.full > >> *) >> _notrun "No encryption support for $FSTYP" >> ;; >> -- >> 2.31.1 >>
On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 05:49:08PM +0800, Xiubo Li wrote: > > On 27/10/2022 11:20, Zorro Lang wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 11:00:21AM +0800, xiubli@redhat.com wrote: > > > From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> > > > --- > > > common/encrypt | 3 +++ > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/common/encrypt b/common/encrypt > > > index 45ce0954..1a77e23b 100644 > > > --- a/common/encrypt > > > +++ b/common/encrypt > > > @@ -153,6 +153,9 @@ _scratch_mkfs_encrypted() > > > # erase the UBI volume; reformated automatically on next mount > > > $UBIUPDATEVOL_PROG ${SCRATCH_DEV} -t > > > ;; > > > + ceph) > > > + _scratch_cleanup_files > > Here I just skip ceph and it is enough. Because the > _require_scratch_encryption() will do the same thing as I did in my V1's 2/2 > patch. Great, actually that's what I hope to know. So the ceph encryption testing can be supported naturally by just enabling ceph in _scratch_mkfs_encrypted. And from the testing output you showed in last patch, it looks good on testing ceph encryption. So I think this patch works as expected. I'll merger this patch if no more review points from ceph list. And feel free to improve cases in encrypt group later if someone fails on ceph. Thanks, Zorro > > - Xiubo > > > > + ;; > > Any commits about that? > > > > Sorry I'm not familar with cephfs, is this patch enough to help ceph to test > > encrypted ceph? Due to you tried to do some "checking" job last time. > > > > Can "./check -g encrypt" work on ceph? May you paste this test result to help > > to review? And welcome review points from ceph list. > > > > Thanks, > > Zorro > > > > [1] > > $ grep -rsn _scratch_mkfs_encrypted tests/generic/ > > tests/generic/395:22:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/396:21:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/580:23:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/581:36:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/595:35:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/613:29:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/621:57:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/429:36:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/397:28:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/398:28:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/421:24:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/440:29:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/419:29:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/435:33:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/593:24:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/576:34:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted_verity &>> $seqres.full > > > > > *) > > > _notrun "No encryption support for $FSTYP" > > > ;; > > > -- > > > 2.31.1 > > > >
On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 10:35:11AM +0100, Luís Henriques wrote: > On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 11:20:23AM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 11:00:21AM +0800, xiubli@redhat.com wrote: > > > From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> > > > --- > > > common/encrypt | 3 +++ > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/common/encrypt b/common/encrypt > > > index 45ce0954..1a77e23b 100644 > > > --- a/common/encrypt > > > +++ b/common/encrypt > > > @@ -153,6 +153,9 @@ _scratch_mkfs_encrypted() > > > # erase the UBI volume; reformated automatically on next mount > > > $UBIUPDATEVOL_PROG ${SCRATCH_DEV} -t > > > ;; > > > + ceph) > > > + _scratch_cleanup_files > > > + ;; > > > > Any commits about that? > > > > Sorry I'm not familar with cephfs, is this patch enough to help ceph to test > > encrypted ceph? Due to you tried to do some "checking" job last time. > > > > Can "./check -g encrypt" work on ceph? May you paste this test result to help > > to review? And welcome review points from ceph list. > > I think Xiubo's patch is likely to be required for enabling encryption > testing in ceph. Simply doing a '_scratch_cleanup_files' is exactly what > network filesystems are doing on _scratch_mkfs(). Thus it makes sense for > ceph to do the same for testing fscrypt support, as we don't really have > an 'mkfs.ceph' tool. > > Now, this patch alone is probably not enough to allow to do all the > validation we're looking for. (But note that I did *not* tried it myself, > so I may be wrong.) I think we'll need to go through each of the > 'encrypt' tests, run it in ceph and see if they are really testing what > they are supposed to. > > But that's just my two cents ;-) Sure :) I just hope to know if this patch is enough to help those encrypt cases start running on ceph. As for some specific testing failures, that can be another patchset. Thanks, Zorro > > Cheers, > -- > Luís > > > > > Thanks, > > Zorro > > > > [1] > > $ grep -rsn _scratch_mkfs_encrypted tests/generic/ > > tests/generic/395:22:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/396:21:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/580:23:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/581:36:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/595:35:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/613:29:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/621:57:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/429:36:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/397:28:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/398:28:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/421:24:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/440:29:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/419:29:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/435:33:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/593:24:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full > > tests/generic/576:34:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted_verity &>> $seqres.full > > > > > *) > > > _notrun "No encryption support for $FSTYP" > > > ;; > > > -- > > > 2.31.1 > > > > > >
On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 11:00:21AM +0800, xiubli@redhat.com wrote: > From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> > > Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> > --- According to more details (in this mail thread) about this patch, I think this patch works. So I'd like to give it my: Reviewed-by: Zorro Lang <zlang@redhat.com> > common/encrypt | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/common/encrypt b/common/encrypt > index 45ce0954..1a77e23b 100644 > --- a/common/encrypt > +++ b/common/encrypt > @@ -153,6 +153,9 @@ _scratch_mkfs_encrypted() > # erase the UBI volume; reformated automatically on next mount > $UBIUPDATEVOL_PROG ${SCRATCH_DEV} -t > ;; > + ceph) > + _scratch_cleanup_files > + ;; > *) > _notrun "No encryption support for $FSTYP" > ;; > -- > 2.31.1 >
On 27/10/2022 20:49, Zorro Lang wrote: > On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 05:49:08PM +0800, Xiubo Li wrote: >> On 27/10/2022 11:20, Zorro Lang wrote: >>> On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 11:00:21AM +0800, xiubli@redhat.com wrote: >>>> From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> >>>> --- >>>> common/encrypt | 3 +++ >>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/common/encrypt b/common/encrypt >>>> index 45ce0954..1a77e23b 100644 >>>> --- a/common/encrypt >>>> +++ b/common/encrypt >>>> @@ -153,6 +153,9 @@ _scratch_mkfs_encrypted() >>>> # erase the UBI volume; reformated automatically on next mount >>>> $UBIUPDATEVOL_PROG ${SCRATCH_DEV} -t >>>> ;; >>>> + ceph) >>>> + _scratch_cleanup_files >> Here I just skip ceph and it is enough. Because the >> _require_scratch_encryption() will do the same thing as I did in my V1's 2/2 >> patch. > Great, actually that's what I hope to know. So the ceph encryption testing > can be supported naturally by just enabling ceph in _scratch_mkfs_encrypted. > > And from the testing output you showed in last patch, it looks good on testing > ceph encryption. So I think this patch works as expected. I'll merger this > patch if no more review points from ceph list. And feel free to improve cases > in encrypt group later if someone fails on ceph. Sure. Thanks very much Zorro! - Xiubo > Thanks, > Zorro > >> - Xiubo >> >>>> + ;; >>> Any commits about that? >>> >>> Sorry I'm not familar with cephfs, is this patch enough to help ceph to test >>> encrypted ceph? Due to you tried to do some "checking" job last time. >>> >>> Can "./check -g encrypt" work on ceph? May you paste this test result to help >>> to review? And welcome review points from ceph list. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Zorro >>> >>> [1] >>> $ grep -rsn _scratch_mkfs_encrypted tests/generic/ >>> tests/generic/395:22:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >>> tests/generic/396:21:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >>> tests/generic/580:23:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >>> tests/generic/581:36:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >>> tests/generic/595:35:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >>> tests/generic/613:29:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >>> tests/generic/621:57:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >>> tests/generic/429:36:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >>> tests/generic/397:28:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >>> tests/generic/398:28:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >>> tests/generic/421:24:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >>> tests/generic/440:29:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >>> tests/generic/419:29:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >>> tests/generic/435:33:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >>> tests/generic/593:24:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted &>> $seqres.full >>> tests/generic/576:34:_scratch_mkfs_encrypted_verity &>> $seqres.full >>> >>>> *) >>>> _notrun "No encryption support for $FSTYP" >>>> ;; >>>> -- >>>> 2.31.1 >>>>
The test result for ceph: [root@lxbceph1 xfstests-dev]# ./check -g encrypt FSTYP -- ceph PLATFORM -- Linux/x86_64 lxbceph1 6.1.0-rc1+ #164 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Mon Oct 24 10:18:33 CST 2022 MKFS_OPTIONS -- 10.72.47.117:40267:/testB MOUNT_OPTIONS -- -o name=admin,nowsync,copyfrom,rasize=4096 -o context=system_u:object_r:root_t:s0 10.72.47.117:40267:/testB /mnt/kcephfs.B generic/395 187s ... 224s generic/396 164s ... 219s generic/397 177s ... 226s generic/398 [not run] kernel doesn't support renameat2 syscall generic/399 [not run] Filesystem ceph not supported in _scratch_mkfs_sized_encrypted generic/419 [not run] kernel doesn't support renameat2 syscall generic/421 170s ... 219s generic/429 179s ... 237s generic/435 3874s generic/440 176s ... 216s generic/548 [not run] xfs_io fiemap failed (old kernel/wrong fs?) generic/549 [not run] xfs_io fiemap failed (old kernel/wrong fs?) generic/550 [not run] encryption policy '-c 9 -n 9 -f 0' is unusable; probably missing kernel crypto API support generic/576 [not run] fsverity utility required, skipped this test generic/580 218s generic/581 209s ... 244s generic/582 [not run] xfs_io fiemap failed (old kernel/wrong fs?) generic/583 [not run] xfs_io fiemap failed (old kernel/wrong fs?) generic/584 [not run] encryption policy '-c 9 -n 9 -v 2 -f 0' is unusable; probably missing kernel crypto API support generic/592 [not run] kernel does not support encryption policy: '-c 1 -n 4 -v 2 -f 8' generic/593 155s ... 223s generic/595 161s ... 194s generic/602 [not run] kernel does not support encryption policy: '-c 1 -n 4 -v 2 -f 16' generic/613 [not run] _get_encryption_nonce() isn't implemented on ceph generic/621 [not run] kernel doesn't support renameat2 syscall generic/693 [not run] encryption policy '-c 1 -n 10 -v 2 -f 0' is unusable; probably missing kernel crypto API support Ran: generic/395 generic/396 generic/397 generic/398 generic/399 generic/419 generic/421 generic/429 generic/435 generic/440 generic/548 generic/549 generic/550 generic/576 generic/580 generic/581 generic/582 generic/583 generic/584 generic/592 generic/593 generic/595 generic/602 generic/613 generic/621 generic/693 Not run: generic/398 generic/399 generic/419 generic/548 generic/549 generic/550 generic/576 generic/582 generic/583 generic/584 generic/592 generic/602 generic/613 generic/621 generic/693 Passed all 26 tests On 27/10/2022 11:00, xiubli@redhat.com wrote: > From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> > > Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> > --- > common/encrypt | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/common/encrypt b/common/encrypt > index 45ce0954..1a77e23b 100644 > --- a/common/encrypt > +++ b/common/encrypt > @@ -153,6 +153,9 @@ _scratch_mkfs_encrypted() > # erase the UBI volume; reformated automatically on next mount > $UBIUPDATEVOL_PROG ${SCRATCH_DEV} -t > ;; > + ceph) > + _scratch_cleanup_files > + ;; > *) > _notrun "No encryption support for $FSTYP" > ;;
diff --git a/common/encrypt b/common/encrypt index 45ce0954..1a77e23b 100644 --- a/common/encrypt +++ b/common/encrypt @@ -153,6 +153,9 @@ _scratch_mkfs_encrypted() # erase the UBI volume; reformated automatically on next mount $UBIUPDATEVOL_PROG ${SCRATCH_DEV} -t ;; + ceph) + _scratch_cleanup_files + ;; *) _notrun "No encryption support for $FSTYP" ;;