[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201117170411.GC1636127@google.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 09:04:11 -0800
From: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>
To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Cc: Daniel Rosenberg <drosen@...gle.com>,
Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>,
Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
Chao Yu <chao@...nel.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@...labora.com>,
kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] fscrypt: Have filesystems handle their d_ops
On 11/17, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 04:03:14AM +0000, Daniel Rosenberg wrote:
> > This shifts the responsibility of setting up dentry operations from
> > fscrypt to the individual filesystems, allowing them to have their own
> > operations while still setting fscrypt's d_revalidate as appropriate.
> >
> > Most filesystems can just use generic_set_encrypted_ci_d_ops, unless
> > they have their own specific dentry operations as well. That operation
> > will set the minimal d_ops required under the circumstances.
> >
> > Since the fscrypt d_ops are set later on, we must set all d_ops there,
> > since we cannot adjust those later on. This should not result in any
> > change in behavior.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Rosenberg <drosen@...gle.com>
>
> Acked-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Hi Ted/Richard,
I'd like to pick this patch series in f2fs/dev for -next, so please let me know
if you have any concern.
Thanks,
Powered by blists - more mailing lists