On 02/23/2011 12:50 PM, Lars Seipel wrote:
On Wednesday 23 February 2011 15:07:55 Peter Jones wrote:
> 1) can btrfs do encrypted volumes?
Not yet. Although this was a planned feature at some point, according to
Josef, nobody has done it yet.
If you want to stack it on top of dm-crypt there are caveats as well.
Right, which is what we'd wind up doing in the encrypted case.
> From btrfs-wiki:
> btrfs volumes on top of dm-crypt block devices (and possibly LVM) require
> write-caching to be turned off on the underlying HDD. Failing to do so, in
> the event of a power failure, may result in corruption not yet handled by
> btrfs code. (2.6.33)
Is this still prevailing as of 2.6.38?
So, don't hold me to this, but it looks as if the normal lvm behaviour was
fixed at least as of d87f4c14f2 . That being said, dm-crypt still just throws
REQ_FLUSH away instead of figuring out the block remaps involved and issuing
the right bios. Of course, this is a problem with dm-crypt and _any_ filesystem.
RFC 882 put the dots in .com.