linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] f2fs updates for v4.2

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20150625043334.GT17109@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Thu, 25 Jun 2015 05:33:34 +0100
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux FS Dev Mailing List <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux F2FS Dev Mailing List 
	<linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] f2fs updates for v4.2

On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 08:42:02PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > New features are:
> >  o per-file encryption (e.g., ext4)
> 
> The new encrypted symlinks needed fixups for the changes that happened
> meanwhile to the symlink handling. I did all that in my merge, and I
> *think* I got it all right, but I would like you to check. In
> particular, I hope you have a test-case and can actually give it a
> whirl on that.
> 
> Al added to cc, just in case he could also check my merge resolution
> of fs/f2fs/namei.c (the merge is commit cfcc0ad47f4c, I'll push it out
> after I've finished the filesystem pulls)

FWIW, linux-next contains fixups for a bunch of such stuff,
including f2fs one.  The only difference between your resolution and
Stephen's fixup is
static const char *f2fs_encrypted_follow_link(struct dentry *dentry,
					      void **cookie)
vs.
static const char *f2fs_encrypted_follow_link(struct dentry *dentry, void **cookie)

Said that, f2fs_symlink() looks odd - we create a directory entry *before*
doing page_symlink().  And if it (or encryption) fails, I don't see anything
that would remove that new directory entry.  What are we ending up with
in such case?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/