Re: [Ecryptfs-devel] [PATCH] ecryptfs: some inode attrs, and a question

[hooanon05]

Dave Kleikamp:
> I think you're hitting on something here.  I never understood  the need
> for the d_drop()s, but taking them out broke things.  They probably are
> just papering over bugs where the ecryptfs inode is not being properly
> updated after changes are made to the lower inode.

As long as cifs_hardlink() calls d_drop() for the target dentry (as the
old version of NFS did), ecryptfs may have to call d_drop() too. But I
believe the d_drop() for the source dentry is unnecessary, as long as
the inode attributes are maintained correctly.
Additionally, when the lower filesystem does NOT call d_drop(), ecryptfs
has no necessary to call it. I'd like to suggest ecryptfs_link() to
check it by d_unhashed().


J. R. Okajima
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/