On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 10:36:12PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Am Mittwoch, 17. Januar 2018, 22:23:54 CET schrieb Eric Biggers: > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 10:12:27PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 11:11 PM, Richard Weinberger <richard@xxxxxx> > wrote: > > > > Eric, > > > > > > > > Am Freitag, 5. Januar 2018, 19:37:44 CET schrieb Eric Biggers: > > > >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:43:12PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote: > > > >> > From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > >> > > > > >> > This series switches ubifs to use the fscrypt helper functions for > > > >> > open/link/rename/lookup/setattr introduced in v4.15. > > > >> > > > > >> > These patches were originally sent in "[PATCH 00/25] fscrypt: add > > > >> > some > > > >> > higher-level helper functions". I've rebased them onto v4.15-rc1. > > > >> > > > > >> > Eric Biggers (5): > > > >> > ubifs: switch to fscrypt_file_open() > > > >> > ubifs: switch to fscrypt_prepare_link() > > > >> > ubifs: switch to fscrypt_prepare_rename() > > > >> > ubifs: switch to fscrypt_prepare_lookup() > > > >> > ubifs: switch to fscrypt_prepare_setattr() > > > >> > > > > >> > fs/ubifs/dir.c | 43 +++++++++++++------------------------------ > > > >> > fs/ubifs/file.c | 41 ++++------------------------------------- > > > >> > 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 67 deletions(-) > > > >> > > > >> Richard, can you take these for UBIFS for v4.16? > > > > > > > > Yes. Thanks a lot for cleaning this up. > > > > > > FYI, this series has merge conflicts with other fscrypt related > > > changes that went via Ted into fs/ubifs. > > > > How so? These apply cleanly to both Linus' tree and to fscrypt/master > > currently. > > Just checked, the problem is this commit: > > commit 9a2cebc6e2368072490a574eafe0f0747d330bbd > Author: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Fri Jan 5 11:30:03 2018 -0800 > > ubifs: free the encrypted symlink target > > It exists also in my tree. I'll drop it and force push. > Sorry for messing up, next time I try hard to be more responsive. > > Thanks, > //richard > Ah yes, sorry for the confusion. The original plan was to just take the initial patches in the "fscrypt: symlink helpers and fscrypt.h cleanup" series, but we decided to take the fs-specific patches through the fscrypt tree too, since the only merge conflict was a "trivial" one in f2fs_symlink(), and it otherwise would have taken a long time to get all those patches as well as the follow-on fscrypt patches applied. Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fscrypt" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|