blk_keyslot_manager is misnamed because it doesn't necessarily manage
keyslots. It actually does several different things:
- Contains the crypto capabilities of the device.
- Provides functions to control the inline encryption hardware.
Originally these were just for programming/evicting keyslots;
however, new functionality (hardware-wrapped keys) will require new
functions here which are unrelated to keyslots. Moreover,
device-mapper devices already (ab)use "keyslot_evict" to pass key
eviction requests to their underlying devices even though
device-mapper devices don't have any keyslots themselves (so it
really should be "evict_key", not "keyslot_evict").
- Sometimes (but not always!) it manages keyslots. Originally it
always did, but device-mapper devices don't have keyslots
themselves, so they use a "passthrough keyslot manager" which
doesn't actually manage keyslots. This hack works, but the
terminology is unnatural. Also, some hardware doesn't have keyslots
and thus also uses a "passthrough keyslot manager" (support for such
hardware is yet to be upstreamed, but it will happen eventually).
Let's stop having keyslot managers which don't actually manage keyslots.
Instead, rename blk_keyslot_manager to blk_crypto_profile.
This is a fairly big change, since for consistency it also has to update
keyslot manager-related function names, variable names, and comments --
not just the actual struct name. However it's still a fairly
straightforward change, as it doesn't change any actual functionality.
Acked-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> # For MMC
Reviewed-by: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20211018180453.40441-4-ebiggers@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
In preparation for renaming struct blk_keyslot_manager to struct
blk_crypto_profile, rename the keyslot-manager.h and keyslot-manager.c
source files. Renaming these files separately before making a lot of
changes to their contents makes it easier for git to understand that
they were renamed.
Acked-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> # For MMC
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Reviewed-by: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20211018180453.40441-3-ebiggers@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
On Snapdragon SoCs, the Linux kernel isn't permitted to directly access
the standard CQHCI crypto configuration registers. Instead, programming
and evicting keys must be done through vendor-specific SMC calls.
To support this hardware, add a ->program_key() method to
'struct cqhci_host_ops'. This allows overriding the standard CQHCI
crypto key programming / eviction procedure.
This is inspired by the corresponding UFS crypto support, which uses
these same SMC calls. See commit 1bc726e26e ("scsi: ufs: Add
program_key() variant op").
Acked-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Satya Tangirala <satyat@google.com>
Reviewed-and-tested-by: Peng Zhou <peng.zhou@mediatek.com>
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210126001456.382989-6-ebiggers@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
Add support for eMMC inline encryption using the blk-crypto framework
(Documentation/block/inline-encryption.rst).
eMMC inline encryption support is specified by the upcoming JEDEC eMMC
v5.2 specification. It is only specified for the CQ interface, not the
non-CQ interface. Although the eMMC v5.2 specification hasn't been
officially released yet, the crypto support was already agreed on
several years ago, and it was already implemented by at least two major
hardware vendors. Lots of hardware in the field already supports and
uses it, e.g. Snapdragon 630 to give one example.
eMMC inline encryption support is very similar to the UFS inline
encryption support which was standardized in the UFS v2.1 specification
and was already upstreamed. The only major difference is that eMMC
limits data unit numbers to 32 bits, unlike UFS's 64 bits.
Like we did with UFS, make the crypto support opt-in by individual
drivers; don't enable it automatically whenever the hardware declares
crypto support. This is necessary because in every case we've seen,
some extra vendor-specific logic is needed to use the crypto support.
Co-developed-by: Satya Tangirala <satyat@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Satya Tangirala <satyat@google.com>
Acked-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Satya Tangirala <satyat@google.com>
Reviewed-and-tested-by: Peng Zhou <peng.zhou@mediatek.com>
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210125183810.198008-5-ebiggers@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
Eric Biggers