Hi Phillip,
On 11/19/05, Phillip Hellewell <[email protected]> wrote:
> +struct ecryptfs_session_key {
> +#define ECRYPTFS_USERSPACE_SHOULD_TRY_TO_DECRYPT 0x01
> +#define ECRYPTFS_USERSPACE_SHOULD_TRY_TO_ENCRYPT 0x02
> +#define ECRYPTFS_CONTAINS_DECRYPTED_KEY 0x04
> +#define ECRYPTFS_CONTAINS_ENCRYPTED_KEY 0x08
> + int32_t flags;
> + int32_t encrypted_key_size;
> + int32_t decrypted_key_size;
> + uint8_t decrypted_key[ECRYPTFS_MAX_KEY_BYTES];
> + uint8_t encrypted_key[ECRYPTFS_MAX_ENCRYPTED_KEY_BYTES];
s32 and u8 are preferred in the kernel.
> +#define OBSERVE_ASSERTS 1
> +#ifdef OBSERVE_ASSERTS
> +#define ASSERT(EX) \
> +do { \
> + if (unlikely(!(EX))) { \
> + printk(KERN_CRIT "ASSERTION FAILED: %s at %s:%d (%s)\n", #EX, \
> + __FILE__, __LINE__, __FUNCTION__); \
> + BUG(); \
> + } \
> +} while (0)
> +#else
> +#define ASSERT(EX) ;
> +#endif /* OBSERVE_ASSERTS */
Any reason why you can't just use BUG and BUG_ON()?
> +
> +/**
> + * Halcrow: What does the kernel VFS do to ensure that there is no
> + * contention for file->private_data?
> + */
Please elaborate?
> +#define ECRYPTFS_FILE_TO_PRIVATE(file) ((struct ecryptfs_file_info *) \
> + ((file)->private_data))
> +#define ECRYPTFS_FILE_TO_PRIVATE_SM(file) ((file)->private_data)
> +#define ECRYPTFS_FILE_TO_LOWER(file) \
> + ((ECRYPTFS_FILE_TO_PRIVATE(file))->wfi_file)
> +#define ECRYPTFS_INODE_TO_PRIVATE(ino) ((struct ecryptfs_inode_info *) \
> + (ino)->u.generic_ip)
> +#define ECRYPTFS_INODE_TO_PRIVATE_SM(ino) ((ino)->u.generic_ip)
> +#define ECRYPTFS_INODE_TO_LOWER(ino) (ECRYPTFS_INODE_TO_PRIVATE(ino)->wii_inode)
> +#define ECRYPTFS_SUPERBLOCK_TO_PRIVATE(super) ((struct ecryptfs_sb_info *) \
> + (super)->s_fs_info)
> +#define ECRYPTFS_SUPERBLOCK_TO_PRIVATE_SM(super) ((super)->s_fs_info)
> +#define ECRYPTFS_SUPERBLOCK_TO_LOWER(super) \
> + (ECRYPTFS_SUPERBLOCK_TO_PRIVATE(super)->wsi_sb)
> +#define ECRYPTFS_DENTRY_TO_PRIVATE_SM(dentry) ((dentry)->d_fsdata)
> +#define ECRYPTFS_DENTRY_TO_PRIVATE(dentry) ((struct ecryptfs_dentry_info *) \
> + (dentry)->d_fsdata)
> +#define ECRYPTFS_DENTRY_TO_LOWER(dentry) \
> + (ECRYPTFS_DENTRY_TO_PRIVATE(dentry)->wdi_dentry)
These wrappers seem rather pointless and obfuscating...
> +int virt_to_scatterlist(const void *addr, int size, struct scatterlist *sg,
> + int sg_size);
Doesn't seem ecryptfs specific, why is it here?
Pekka
-
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]
