Dave Kleikamp: > I think you're hitting on something here. I never understood the need > for the d_drop()s, but taking them out broke things. They probably are > just papering over bugs where the ecryptfs inode is not being properly > updated after changes are made to the lower inode. As long as cifs_hardlink() calls d_drop() for the target dentry (as the old version of NFS did), ecryptfs may have to call d_drop() too. But I believe the d_drop() for the source dentry is unnecessary, as long as the inode attributes are maintained correctly. Additionally, when the lower filesystem does NOT call d_drop(), ecryptfs has no necessary to call it. I'd like to suggest ecryptfs_link() to check it by d_unhashed(). J. R. Okajima -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
