From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Al Viro Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] f2fs updates for v4.2 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2015 05:33:34 +0100 Message-ID: <20150625043334.GT17109@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20150624202401.GA40031@jaegeuk-mac02.mot.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jaegeuk Kim , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux FS Dev Mailing List , Linux F2FS Dev Mailing List , Stephen Rothwell To: Linus Torvalds Return-path: Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:58260 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750831AbbFYEdj (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Jun 2015 00:33:39 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 08:42:02PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > > > New features are: > > o per-file encryption (e.g., ext4) > > The new encrypted symlinks needed fixups for the changes that happened > meanwhile to the symlink handling. I did all that in my merge, and I > *think* I got it all right, but I would like you to check. In > particular, I hope you have a test-case and can actually give it a > whirl on that. > > Al added to cc, just in case he could also check my merge resolution > of fs/f2fs/namei.c (the merge is commit cfcc0ad47f4c, I'll push it out > after I've finished the filesystem pulls) FWIW, linux-next contains fixups for a bunch of such stuff, including f2fs one. The only difference between your resolution and Stephen's fixup is static const char *f2fs_encrypted_follow_link(struct dentry *dentry, void **cookie) vs. static const char *f2fs_encrypted_follow_link(struct dentry *dentry, void **cookie) Said that, f2fs_symlink() looks odd - we create a directory entry *before* doing page_symlink(). And if it (or encryption) fails, I don't see anything that would remove that new directory entry. What are we ending up with in such case?