On 3/16/22 7:50 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
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.
I have gone through the wip-fscrypt, all these look fine.
-- Xiubo
