On Wed, 2022-03-16 at 11:51 +0800, xiubli@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Since the base64_encrypted file name shouldn't exceed the NAME_SIZE,
> no need to allocate a buffer from the stack that long.
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>
> Jeff, you can just squash this into the previous commit.
>
>
> fs/ceph/mds_client.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ceph/mds_client.c b/fs/ceph/mds_client.c
> index c51b07ec72cf..cd0c780a6f84 100644
> --- a/fs/ceph/mds_client.c
> +++ b/fs/ceph/mds_client.c
> @@ -2579,7 +2579,7 @@ char *ceph_mdsc_build_path(struct dentry *dentry, int *plen, u64 *pbase, int for
> parent = dget_parent(cur);
> } else {
> int len, ret;
> - char buf[FSCRYPT_BASE64URL_CHARS(NAME_MAX)];
> + char buf[NAME_MAX];
>
> /*
> * Proactively copy name into buf, in case we need to present
Thanks Xiubo. I folded this into:
ceph: add encrypted fname handling to ceph_mdsc_build_path
...and merged in the other patches you sent earlier today.
I also went ahead and squashed down the readdir patches that you sent
yesterday, so that we could get rid of the interim readdir handling that
I had originally written.
It might need a bit more cleanup -- some of the deltas in the merged
patch probably belong in earlier commits, but it should be ok for now.
Please take a look and make sure I didn't miss anything there.
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
