Re: [PATCH 12/12: eCryptfs] Crypto functions

Dave Kleikamp
2005-11-03T22:30:15Z

On Thu, 2005-11-03 at 16:25 -0600, Michael Thompson wrote:
> On 11/3/05, Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@austin.ibm.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 20:56 -0700, Phillip Hellewell wrote:
> > > + ecryptfs_fput(lower_file);
> >
> > Why the call to ecryptfs_fput() here? The caller does it's own fput on
> > lower_file.
>
> Hmm, good catch. That slipped through us - and to be hoenst, I have no
> explination other than, it's wrong. ecryptfs_write_headers should not
> be responsible for put'ing that which it did not get.
>
> I'm wondering if I should be sending 1 patch per tiny fix like this,
> or if I should be waiting for a few more changes, so as to not flood
> the threads with minor patches?

Well, I found it trying to look for the cause of bug 1228303, but I
haven't actually run anything to verify it. It may be worth checking if
it fixes that problem, and if it does, it would bump up its importance.

> Thanks,
> Mike
>
--
David Kleikamp
IBM Linux Technology Center