On 2012-01-23 08:49:40, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > As Linus pointed out[1], eCryptfs needs more checks around its truncate path. > > The first patch in this series makes it possible for an eCryptfs truncate > > operation to be gracefully interrupted by a fatal signal. The second adds > > checks for eCryptfs inode changes in setattr. The third is simply removal of > > an old, unused function. > > Tyler, should I take these patches directly? Or are these just for > review and I should wait for a pull request? Just for review, as I'll send a pull request. I'll try to be more clear about that in the future. Tyler
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
