From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753912AbcALXjR (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 12 Jan 2016 18:39:17 -0500
Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.10]:54736 "EHLO
	mout.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752483AbcALXjP (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 12 Jan 2016 18:39:15 -0500
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>
Cc: device-mapper development <dm-devel@redhat.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Milan Broz <gmazyland@gmail.com>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, keith.busch@intel.com,
        linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, martin.petersen@oracle.com,
        Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>,
        Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linaro.org>, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
        neilb@suse.com, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        sagig@mellanox.com, tj@kernel.org, dan.j.williams@intel.com,
        Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@gmail.com>,
        Alasdair G Kergon <agk@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH v2 0/2] Introduce the bulk IV mode for improving the crypto engine efficiency
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 00:38:45 +0100
Message-ID: <5514385.nEhTK7fEcU@wuerfel>
User-Agent: KMail/4.11.5 (Linux/3.16.0-10-generic; KDE/4.11.5; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.02.1601121744400.18228@file01.intranet.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com>
References: <cover.1450233399.git.baolin.wang@linaro.org> <20160104201343.GQ16023@sirena.org.uk> <alpine.LRH.2.02.1601121744400.18228@file01.intranet.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:icYt6YC6Bnr7TLRTW7SV8eo0H1vyhBvWKrTALEwh8V2cAV8y7iJ
 uNifvPOm2WWYaYV2WdF+7pG0I0UciN2AQ6BKbtYPTctFwyCPp7e5Vdn/QP94GjJfI2BXmST
 idQFG8oBzX64J3pB+N4o4887s8/gVKRT6CNLv9IKeBSP5utA9/sV/LIi+XQtoe/UFN4fZsQ
 BynXtLSDGF5i8if7Wtcpg==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:TyOe+DTOG3k=:EG79ZV8SKFZ16fFWoI3rWP
 HX5ukyHM67kAq3tehIbPewyORy11HxMmPU87QEQuz06bvemqBleXISfC9+faw6tYbP114iRE4
 /l17XaMTO6zjH+7DpnskwjH3H6XPOmO+Ua0gIIuFbzi3d2TIJcO9POrdAjq+Ooxz36rQSo6hl
 uyBqjajQaIMGW+SDSvJmAd/eBBJi3wxIN3vl3UcWINkmTYOWmu4mY9HOlh8k8lpz50DgQXzJu
 0K8/cy/5oPH91E6jQNRfqraYfA5KoHy3+0/K5qanadvbqEDRnumt4ZdjVzprjWo8S6/6mXxNn
 IhiaKWdYtEdGLsre0u7FoempxU0AjUoK/zzqCt81YdW2es/JYtGp9T9+SwUPWChaL13tRSyJd
 XqwuW7IOBPQub8F+yWYxwfIVSIXQY0/PsvIevSk4aZkFudckCt5hMVo9MBOLChRuRILQkte4X
 AH3J2CewrzOapVUlrqkD0id4KNiHZqA/hVqWwrgIiw7DT0TAablmIP+n+05Y3QRT+gvKKKFze
 03BPIgXq8fGlPhcus36jJuPDMTm0DiIPkzofcwng19KAabM1okwq3kG3acctC1Hvr8NtubYyT
 5mUw5sWGWXIITUtXYNb9aMqc7Qoxh8zlywnyOUlbFrG/9V4XlDzHquktWeBH+q3ToupXE/tAQ
 Ev3NAFsWqk4i95RLRNEi/SPuRAa+7malK6Gqm4KW+3fVytcs7nRdRctgRnSp9IlUuIUf7rrW/
 1gfgpatfYoM5aiKM
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tuesday 12 January 2016 18:31:19 Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> 
> Another possibility is to use dm-crypt block size 4k and use a filesystem 
> with 4k blocksize on it (it will never send requests not aligned on 4k 
> boundary, so we could reject such requests with an error).

Is there ever a reason to use something other than 4K block size on
dm-crypt?

	Arnd