From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out30-119.freemail.mail.aliyun.com (out30-119.freemail.mail.aliyun.com [115.124.30.119]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0E9E540F724 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2026 07:49:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=115.124.30.119 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789544999; cv=none; b=FA8fGy4nFv49o2O6emrRGBqU4mgZHatcpcHgopXhzi7FZ5grtrD4pR0MGjYjOZMP2S87M9CuouNkxRX6pvLBF0p1sQtolqFX3eD1N/8sIwY7blG+fyItc7jNK3UXYP8BBPsEd+HExMxmJG1DZBYIW3M0AB9VLpm5wK8iC11w4Ig= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789544999; c=relaxed/simple; bh=VC01o4Bs/psfiDdR+JJbj4W6tqdQfjnbM9/8A7RB2hM=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=iGASOMZn6smTNGPRqg8459LT33K7Xo3iBKujrAtj37UkN6Am1EJR4/pVUQOb/Ij/Z0WYtVHC0nBnZcgTlGUip48uRMyzVn2grIIBnyPB9AJGub1kJYFSlR8lOFi3CYYAIkQn+Op0+2Rsvf6kR/XA8DfmJVS+Un93CU6z00sZOOc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.alibaba.com header.i=@linux.alibaba.com header.b=ECqHbOMd; arc=none smtp.client-ip=115.124.30.119 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.alibaba.com header.i=@linux.alibaba.com header.b="ECqHbOMd" DKIM-Signature:v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.alibaba.com; s=default; t=1789544984; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:From:Content-Type; bh=Dl2GDDJCkEG6SKosJakzt26lKSBH8U9pIS/WYC2v5MY=; b=ECqHbOMdxNuDRgNYWfh1ysvy683VNenBbm44IKoHjLaKOoNBer6Iy6Fdxk9IdZIQ0cPptjWUNkUNbl81wrQ2S2lB+5JO1X1JTuis8gloLfdHlxLkyvqm0hd2JK51iIrPMosRoiAECfcXqEzXix5qNtSrCQYcBaq96hqQas3N0zA= X-Alimail-AntiSpam:AC=PASS;BC=-1|-1;BR=01201311R131e4;CH=green;DM=||false|;DS=||;FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1;HT=maildocker-contentspam033037033178;MF=joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com;NM=1;PH=DS;RN=11;SR=0;TI=SMTPD_---0XB4BRZv_1789544982; Received: from 30.221.129.239(mailfrom:joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0XB4BRZv_1789544982 cluster:ay36) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com; Wed, 16 Sep 2026 15:49:43 +0800 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2026 15:49:41 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/8] ocfs2: Copy the xattr name in ocfs2_initxattrs To: Daniel Borkmann , alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com Cc: brauner@kernel.org, dwindsor@gmail.com, john.fastabend@gmail.com, memxor@gmail.com, kpsingh@kernel.org, matt@bobrowski.net, bpf@vger.kernel.org, Zhan Xusheng , ocfs2-devel@lists.linux.dev References: <20260915150739.284189-1-daniel@iogearbox.net> <20260915150739.284189-2-daniel@iogearbox.net> <4eba77a2-a66f-438d-a769-40398564304f@linux.alibaba.com> <814e1ffd-fc08-40f6-b3ac-b002d2ac08cc@iogearbox.net> From: Joseph Qi In-Reply-To: <814e1ffd-fc08-40f6-b3ac-b002d2ac08cc@iogearbox.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 9/16/26 3:37 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > Hi Joseph, > > On 9/16/26 9:28 AM, Joseph Qi wrote: >> Hi, >> I have reworked security xattrs in local, which addresses a review >> comments from sashiko. >> >> The fix will allocate an array in ocfs2_initxattrs(), copy the names >> and values, account for all of them in the credit calculations, and >> write each one in ocfs2_init_security_set(). >> >> It seems if with it, your patch is no longer needed. I'll send out >> later. > > Ah perfect! I guess this means you'd be routing this rework via your > tree, we'll just drop this fix on our side, and eventually both sides > would meet at Linus' tree? If so, that sounds fine to me and would avoid > a merge conflict. > Yes, I think so. It will go to mm-tree first and then linux-next. I'll cc you as well when send out the patch. Thanks, Joseph