[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20210702065350.209646-6-ebiggers@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2021 23:53:50 -0700
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
To: linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 5/5] fscrypt: remove mention of symlink st_size quirk from documentation
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...gle.com>
Now that the correct st_size is reported for encrypted symlinks on all
filesystems, update the documentation accordingly.
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...gle.com>
---
Documentation/filesystems/fscrypt.rst | 5 -----
1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/fscrypt.rst b/Documentation/filesystems/fscrypt.rst
index 44b67ebd6e40..02ec57818920 100644
--- a/Documentation/filesystems/fscrypt.rst
+++ b/Documentation/filesystems/fscrypt.rst
@@ -1063,11 +1063,6 @@ astute users may notice some differences in behavior:
- DAX (Direct Access) is not supported on encrypted files.
-- The st_size of an encrypted symlink will not necessarily give the
- length of the symlink target as required by POSIX. It will actually
- give the length of the ciphertext, which will be slightly longer
- than the plaintext due to NUL-padding and an extra 2-byte overhead.
-
- The maximum length of an encrypted symlink is 2 bytes shorter than
the maximum length of an unencrypted symlink. For example, on an
EXT4 filesystem with a 4K block size, unencrypted symlinks can be up
--
2.32.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists