[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190416230840.GB14623@mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 19:08:40 -0400
From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org,
Sarthak Kukreti <sarthakkukreti@...omium.org>,
Gao Xiang <gaoxiang25@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] fscrypt: clean up and improve dentry revalidation
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 11:39:09AM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...gle.com>
>
> Make various improvements to fscrypt dentry revalidation:
>
> - Don't try to handle the case where the per-directory key is removed,
> as this can't happen without the inode (and dentries) being evicted.
>
> - Flag ciphertext dentries rather than plaintext dentries, since it's
> ciphertext dentries that need the special handling.
>
> - Avoid doing unnecessary work for non-ciphertext dentries.
>
> - When revalidating ciphertext dentries, try to set up the directory's
> i_crypt_info to make sure the key is really still absent, rather than
> invalidating all negative dentries as the previous code did. An old
> comment suggested we can't do this for locking reasons, but AFAICT
> this comment was outdated and it actually works fine.
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...gle.com>
Looks good, applied.
- Ted
Powered by blists - more mailing lists