[PATCH 5/6] Unionfs: unionfs_lookup locking consistency

behavior. This cleanup allowed us to remove two unnecessary int declarations. Signed-off-by: Erez Zadok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Acked-by: Josef Sipek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- fs/unionfs/inode.c |6 +- fs/unionfs/lookup.c | 38 +++--- 2 files changed, 2

[PATCH 6/6] Unionfs: cache coherency after lower objects are removed

Prevent an oops if a lower file is deleted and then it is stat'ed from the upper layer. Ensure that we return a negative dentry so the user will get an ENOENT. Properly dput/mntput so we don't leak references at the lower file system. Signed-off-by: Erez Zadok <[EMAIL PROTECT

Re: [PATCH 4/11] eCryptfs: Replace encrypt, decrypt, and inode size write

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Michael Halcrow writes: > On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 10:46:26PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > (from ecryptfs_encrypt_page()): > > > + enc_extent_virt = kmalloc(PAGE_CACHE_SIZE, GFP_USER); > > > > I'd have thought that alloc_page() would be nicer. After all, we _are_ >

Re: [Ecryptfs-devel] [PATCH] eCryptfs: fix possible fault in ecryptfs_sync_page

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Michael Halcrow writes: > On Thu, Aug 23, 2007 at 04:42:59PM +0900, Ryusuke Konishi wrote: > > This will avoid a possible fault in ecryptfs_sync_page(). > > Acked-by: Michael Halcrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Note that there are other outstanding issues with eCryptfs

Re: [RFC PATCH] overlayfs: support more than one read-only layer

Indeed, Miklos, changing layers dynamically is VERY tricky. Unionfs supports that, but a good amount of its code all over is dedicated to handling dynamic layer changes. I advise you to avoid supporting this feature for a while, if ever: get a small, functional, working overlayfs first. I per

<    1   2   3   4   5