On 04/27/2016 12:10 PM, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Dave Kleikamp <dave.kleikamp@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 04/22/2016 07:43 AM, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
>>> Instead of stripping "os2." prefixes in __jfs_setxattr, make callers
>>> strip them, as __jfs_getxattr already does. With that change, use the
>>> same name mapping function in jfs_{get,set,remove}xattr.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> fs/jfs/xattr.c | 80 ++++++++++++++++++----------------------------------------
>>> 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/jfs/xattr.c b/fs/jfs/xattr.c
>>> index 5becc6a..9cdf7dc 100644
>>> --- a/fs/jfs/xattr.c
>>> +++ b/fs/jfs/xattr.c
>>
>> --- cut ---
>>
>>> @@ -946,18 +926,8 @@ ssize_t jfs_getxattr(struct dentry *dentry, struct inode *inode,
>>> if (!strncmp(name, XATTR_SYSTEM_PREFIX, XATTR_SYSTEM_PREFIX_LEN))
>>> return generic_getxattr(dentry, inode, name, data, buf_size);
>>
>> Am I missing a prerequisite patch? This patch doesn't apply because
>> generic_getxattr() doesn't have an inode parameter.
>
> This is based on the work.xattr branch of
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/viro/vfs.git, sorry. The
> additional parameter is the only difference as far as jfs is
> concerned.
Should these patches go through Al's work.xattr branch? If so, please
add my:
Acked-by: Dave Kleikamp <dave.kleikamp@xxxxxxxxxx>
Otherwise I can push a "clean" version against mainline through the jfs
tree, but they'll require a merge at some point.
Thanks,
Dave
--
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
