ecryptfs-devel team mailing list archive
-
ecryptfs-devel team
-
Mailing list archive
-
Message #00032
Re: [PATCH] ecryptfs: some inode attrs, and a question
On Tue, 2009-01-20 at 00:25 +0900, hooanon05@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Dave Kleikamp:
> > > > For a regular file, the size of the upper inode is not the same as the
> > > > size of the lower inode. The lower inode includes the header blocks
> > > > which are not visible in the upper inode. So ecryptfs_interpose() will
> > > > overwrite the correct upper inode size.
> :::
> > It's restoring i_size to the correct value after ecryptfs_interpose
> > updates it with the wrong value.
>
> Does "ecryptfs_interpose() will overwrite the correct upper inode size"
> means ecryptfs_interpose() sets a wrong value?
Yes. ecryptfs_interpose() will copy the lower inode's size to the upper
inode. For an encrypted file, the lower inode will have a larger size,
since the lower file is prefixed with a header.
> If so, I can understand why ecryptfs_link() sets i_size.
Shaggy
--
David Kleikamp
IBM Linux Technology Center
Follow ups
References
-
Re: [PATCH] ecryptfs: some inode attrs, and a question
From: Dave Kleikamp, 2009-01-13
-
Re: [PATCH] ecryptfs: some inode attrs, and a question
From: Tyler Hicks, 2009-01-15
-
Re: [PATCH] ecryptfs: some inode attrs, and a question
From: hooanon05, 2009-01-16
-
Re: [PATCH] ecryptfs: some inode attrs, and a question
From: Dave Kleikamp, 2009-01-16
-
Re: [PATCH] ecryptfs: some inode attrs, and a question
From: hooanon05, 2009-01-17
-
Re: [PATCH] ecryptfs: some inode attrs, and a question
From: Dave Kleikamp, 2009-01-17
-
Re: [PATCH] ecryptfs: some inode attrs, and a question
From: hooanon05, 2009-01-17
-
Re: [PATCH] ecryptfs: some inode attrs, and a question
From: Dave Kleikamp, 2009-01-17
-
Re: [PATCH] ecryptfs: some inode attrs, and a question
From: hooanon05, 2009-01-19
-
Re: [PATCH] ecryptfs: some inode attrs, and a question
From: Dave Kleikamp, 2009-01-19
-
Re: [PATCH] ecryptfs: some inode attrs, and a question
From: hooanon05, 2009-01-19