Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934350AbXHXCem (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Aug 2007 22:34:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932484AbXHXCed (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Aug 2007 22:34:33 -0400 Received: from tama5.ecl.ntt.co.jp ([129.60.39.102]:63436 "EHLO tama5.ecl.ntt.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932095AbXHXCec (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Aug 2007 22:34:32 -0400 Message-Id: <200708240233.AA00248@paprika.lab.ntt.co.jp> From: Ryusuke Konishi Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 11:33:41 +0900 To: Michael Halcrow Cc: moriai.satoshi@lab.ntt.co.jp, Andrew Morton , ecryptfs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Ecryptfs-devel] [PATCH] eCryptfs: fix possible fault in ecryptfs_sync_page In-Reply-To: <20070823143745.GM22689@halcrow.austin.ibm.com> References: <20070823143745.GM22689@halcrow.austin.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: AL-Mail32 Version 1.13 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1538 Lines: 33 On Thu, 23 Aug 2007, Michael Halcrow write: >Note that there are other outstanding issues with eCryptfs on NFS. For >instance, prepare_write()/commit_write() have gone away in -mm, >leading to an oops when eCryptfs tries to call them directly Yes, I certainly encountered the problem during testing eCryptfs on -mm, and found Nick Piggin's new aops patchset lacks changes for eCryptfs. >which is >well deserved, since eCryptfs really should not be doing that. Unionfs >has just two places where it calls vfs_read() and vfs_write() >respectively; eCryptfs is a bit more complex, with multiple write >paths that end up writing encrypted data and updating metadata in the >header. I am currently trying to find a way to convert everything over >to vfs_read() and vfs_write() in eCryptfs, in a way that does not >ultimately result in a kernel hang. OK, I understand the reason and your plan. Thanks for letting me know! As you say, I honestly felt that it's a difficult task to write stackable filesystems using low level operations. It's good idea to replace them with the vfs functions. So, how long does it take for the conversion, do you think? Though I'm currenty focussing on eCryptfs in mainline, I'd like to shift my focus to the new one if it's preferable. Regards, Ryusuke Konishi - 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/