From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: hooanon05@yahoo.co.jp
Subject: Re: [Ecryptfs-devel] [PATCH] ecryptfs: some inode attrs, and a question
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 11:17:34 +0900
Message-ID: <7087.1232331454@jrobl>
References: <7471.1231827621@jrobl> <1231852628.6954.4.camel@norville.austin.ibm.com> <496FAFE2.8020102@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <9829.1232091366@jrobl> <1232125169.15209.19.camel@norville.austin.ibm.com> <7210.1232172192@jrobl> <1232210546.7015.8.camel@norville.austin.ibm.com> <10394.1232214142@jrobl> <1232215916.7015.78.camel@norville.austin.ibm.com>
Cc: Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ecryptfs-devel@lists.launchpad.net
To: Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner+glk-linux-kernel-3=40m.gmane.org-S1758095AbZASCR4@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <1232215916.7015.78.camel@norville.austin.ibm.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org


Dave Kleikamp:
> For a regular file, the size of the upper inode is not the same as the
> size of the lower inode.  The lower inode includes the header blocks
> which are not visible in the upper inode.  So ecryptfs_interpose() will
> overwrite the correct upper inode size.

Then it means updating i_size in ecryptfs_link() is unnecessary...


J. R. Okajima