On Thu, 2005-11-03 at 16:25 -0600, Michael Thompson wrote:
> On 11/3/05, Dave Kleikamp <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2005-11-02 at 20:56 -0700, Phillip Hellewell wrote:
> > > + ecryptfs_fput(lower_file);
> >
> > Why the call to ecryptfs_fput() here? The caller does it's own fput on
> > lower_file.
>
> Hmm, good catch. That slipped through us - and to be hoenst, I have no
> explination other than, it's wrong. ecryptfs_write_headers should not
> be responsible for put'ing that which it did not get.
>
> I'm wondering if I should be sending 1 patch per tiny fix like this,
> or if I should be waiting for a few more changes, so as to not flood
> the threads with minor patches?
Well, I found it trying to look for the cause of bug 1228303, but I
haven't actually run anything to verify it. It may be worth checking if
it fixes that problem, and if it does, it would bump up its importance.
> Thanks,
> Mike
>
--
David Kleikamp
IBM Linux Technology Center
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
