xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 00/18] Consolidate Posix ACL implementation

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/18] Consolidate Posix ACL implementation
From: Andreas Gruenbacher <andreas.gruenbacher@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 18:57:14 +0100 (CET)
Cc: viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-btrfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-f2fs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-mtd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@xxxxxxxx>, Joel Becker <jlbec@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, reiserfs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, jfs-discussion@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, cluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxx, linux-nfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20131201115903.910559036@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20131201115903.910559036@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Thread-index: w9VnKymeqAJLAKzWL98RahV/Sz0+pQ==
Thread-topic: Consolidate Posix ACL implementation
Christoph,

nice work, and a pretty diffstat.

I see that get_acl and set_acl are being defined in some but not all symlink 
inode operations (for example, btrfs them while ext4 does not), and that 
posix_acl_xattr_set() doesn't check if set_acl is defined.  Symlinks cannot 
have ACLs, so set_acl should either never be defined for symlinks (and a NULL 
check is then needed in posix_acl_xattr_set()), or it is defined in all inode 
operations, and S_ISNLNK() check is needed in posix_acl_xattr_set().  That 
latter check should probably be added in any case to be on the safe side.

  Test case:

  setfattr -h -n system.posix_acl_access \
           -v 0sAgAAAAEABgD/////AgAGABMEAAAEAAYA/////xAABgD/////IAAEAP////8= \
           symlink

Patch 6 also declares posix_acl_prepare() but this function is never 
introduced; this must be a leftover from a previous version.

Thanks,
Andreas

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>