This doesn't have any practical effect at the moment because the
values of BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE, QCRYPTO_BLOCK_LUKS_SECTOR_SIZE and
QCRYPTO_BLOCK_QCOW_SECTOR_SIZE are all the same (512 bytes), but
future encryption methods could have different requirements.
Signed-off-by: Alberto Garcia <berto@igalia.com>
---
block/qcow2.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/block/qcow2.c b/block/qcow2.c
index 7277feda13..010a1b3924 100644
--- a/block/qcow2.c
+++ b/block/qcow2.c
@@ -1627,7 +1627,7 @@ static void qcow2_refresh_limits(BlockDriverState *bs, Error **errp)
if (bs->encrypted) {
/* Encryption works on a sector granularity */
- bs->bl.request_alignment = BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE;
+ bs->bl.request_alignment = qcrypto_block_get_sector_size(s->crypto);
}
bs->bl.pwrite_zeroes_alignment = s->cluster_size;
bs->bl.pdiscard_alignment = s->cluster_size;
--
2.11.0
On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 01:58:02PM +0300, Alberto Garcia wrote: > This doesn't have any practical effect at the moment because the > values of BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE, QCRYPTO_BLOCK_LUKS_SECTOR_SIZE and > QCRYPTO_BLOCK_QCOW_SECTOR_SIZE are all the same (512 bytes), but > future encryption methods could have different requirements. Yep, this matches what we do in block/crypto.c > > Signed-off-by: Alberto Garcia <berto@igalia.com> > --- > block/qcow2.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) Reviewed-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com> Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
Am 11.10.2018 um 12:58 hat Alberto Garcia geschrieben: > This doesn't have any practical effect at the moment because the > values of BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE, QCRYPTO_BLOCK_LUKS_SECTOR_SIZE and > QCRYPTO_BLOCK_QCOW_SECTOR_SIZE are all the same (512 bytes), but > future encryption methods could have different requirements. > > Signed-off-by: Alberto Garcia <berto@igalia.com> Thanks, applied to the block branch. Kevin
On 11.10.18 12:58, Alberto Garcia wrote: > This doesn't have any practical effect at the moment because the > values of BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE, QCRYPTO_BLOCK_LUKS_SECTOR_SIZE and > QCRYPTO_BLOCK_QCOW_SECTOR_SIZE are all the same (512 bytes), but > future encryption methods could have different requirements. > > Signed-off-by: Alberto Garcia <berto@igalia.com> > --- > block/qcow2.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) This breaks non-LUKS encryption: $ ./qemu-img create -f qcow2 -o encryption=on,encrypt.key-secret=secret --object secret,id=secret,data=foo foo.qcow2 64M Formatting 'foo.qcow2', fmt=qcow2 size=67108864 encryption=on encrypt.key-secret=secret cluster_size=65536 lazy_refcounts=off refcount_bits=16 qemu-img: block.c:1248: bdrv_open_driver: Assertion `is_power_of_2(bs->bl.request_alignment)' failed. [1] 13589 abort (core dumped) ./qemu-img create -f qcow2 -o encryption=on,encrypt.key-secret=secret --objec (As seen in iotests 049, 087, 134, and 158.) Max
On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 06:38:14PM +0200, Max Reitz wrote: > On 11.10.18 12:58, Alberto Garcia wrote: > > This doesn't have any practical effect at the moment because the > > values of BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE, QCRYPTO_BLOCK_LUKS_SECTOR_SIZE and > > QCRYPTO_BLOCK_QCOW_SECTOR_SIZE are all the same (512 bytes), but > > future encryption methods could have different requirements. > > > > Signed-off-by: Alberto Garcia <berto@igalia.com> > > --- > > block/qcow2.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > This breaks non-LUKS encryption: > > $ ./qemu-img create -f qcow2 -o encryption=on,encrypt.key-secret=secret > --object secret,id=secret,data=foo foo.qcow2 64M > Formatting 'foo.qcow2', fmt=qcow2 size=67108864 encryption=on > encrypt.key-secret=secret cluster_size=65536 lazy_refcounts=off > refcount_bits=16 > qemu-img: block.c:1248: bdrv_open_driver: Assertion > `is_power_of_2(bs->bl.request_alignment)' failed. > [1] 13589 abort (core dumped) ./qemu-img create -f qcow2 -o > encryption=on,encrypt.key-secret=secret --objec > > (As seen in iotests 049, 087, 134, and 158.) We failed to set sector size in the crypto backend when opening with the NO_IO flag set. I just sent a fix for that. Feel free to queue it as part of the block layer rather than waiting for my next crypto layer pull request. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.