Luís Henriques <lhenriques@xxxxxxx> writes: > Hi Xiubo, > > xiubli@xxxxxxxxxx writes: > >> From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> This patch series is base on the 'wip-fscrypt' branch in ceph-client. > > I gave this patchset a try but it looks broken. For example, if 'mydir' > is an encrypted *and* locked directory doing: > > # ls -l mydir/.snap > > will result in: > > fscrypt (ceph, inode 1099511627782): Error -105 getting encryption context > > My RFC patch had an issue that I haven't fully analyzed (and that I > "fixed" using the d_drop()). But why is the much simpler approach I used > not acceptable? (I.e simply use fscryt_auth from parent in > ceph_get_snapdir()). > >> V3: >> - Add more detail comments in the commit comments and code comments. >> - Fix some bugs. >> - Improved the patches. >> - Remove the already merged patch. >> >> V2: >> - Fix several bugs, such as for the long snap name encrypt/dencrypt >> - Skip double dencypting dentry names for readdir >> >> ====== >> >> NOTE: This patch series won't fix the long snap shot issue as Luis >> is working on that. > > Yeah, I'm getting back to it right now. Let's see if I can untangle this > soon ;-) OK, I've an initial attempt with PR#45224. I don't think I have the right permissions to explicitly request reviews, so I thought I'd better let you know about the PR by email. Cheers, -- Luís
