DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=s9/vLHqWQ0exglsPLgHyR4C+X1+qzqDb+2nHqUxaGW2bHHt9yDB9NLxRYagIqsN6zUB8lsu8AdFcw7tK0nJ5KrW+QTOphLsZ1GRtilL6VntC1Ak6vZMDjExEPijS8c2wuzJKErztmoEodbx7NSIZQOY+EIw/ZrlVrfpyIgfjT9U=
Message-ID: <afcef88a0511210813i5a5f4382k1b5e876fbbb9a931@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 10:13:57 -0600
From: Michael Thompson <michael.craig.thompson@gmail.com>
To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/12: eCryptfs] Superblock operations
Cc: Phillip Hellewell <phillip@hellewell.homeip.net>, akpm@osdl.org,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
       viro@ftp.linux.org.uk, mike@halcrow.us, mhalcrow@us.ibm.com,
       mcthomps@us.ibm.com, yoder1@us.ibm.com
In-Reply-To: <1132588916.8487.3.camel@localhost>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <20051119041130.GA15559@sshock.rn.byu.edu>
	 <20051119041910.GF15747@sshock.rn.byu.edu>
	 <84144f020511190250x2efdbfb4vf33245b3f7216fe5@mail.gmail.com>
	 <afcef88a0511210757y4fdb8c57w221b0fc9e7ee3ee4@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1132588916.8487.3.camel@localhost>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1280
Lines: 40

On 11/21/05, Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 11/19/05, Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi> wrote:
> > > > +/**
> > > > + * This is called through iput_final().
> > > > + * This is function will replace generic_drop_inode. The end result of which
> > > > + * is we are skipping the check in inode->i_nlink, which we do not use.
> > > > + */
> > > > +static void ecryptfs_drop_inode(struct inode *inode) {
> > > > +       generic_delete_inode(inode);
> > > > +}
> > >
> > > Please drop this useless wrapper and introduce it when it actually
> > > does something.
>
> On Mon, 2005-11-21 at 09:57 -0600, Michael Thompson wrote:
> > I don't see a problem with doing that, but perhaps there is? Please
> > elaborate if so.
>
> You can set ecryptfs_sops->drop_inode to generic_delete_inode directly,
> no?

Yes, I do believe I could do that and save a function call. My mind is
wobbely today.

>
>                         Pekka
>
>


--
Michael C. Thompson <mcthomps@us.ibm.com>
Software-Engineer, IBM LTC Security
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/