On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 11:49 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 02:58:36PM -0400, Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote: >> I think the point is that a new VFS feature that is easy to integrate in >> multiple filesystems should have support for those filesystems. A decade >> ago, just having ext* support would probably have been fine, but these days, >> XFS, BTRFS, and F2FS are used just as much (if not more) on production >> systems as ext4, and having support for them right from the start would >> significantly help with adoption of richacls. > > That's one reason. The other is that actually wiring it up for more > than a single consumer shows its actually reasonable generic. The filesystem interface now is the same as for POSIX ACLs, used by a dozen or so filesystems already. > I don't want to end up with a situration like Posix ACLs again where > different file systems using different on disk formats again. Any file system could choose a different on-disk format than the one that ext4 currently uses, but I don't see a reason why any should. Apart from uid / gid mappings that is the same as the user-space xattr format. Network file systems like NFSv4 and CIFS with their predefined over-the-wire formats obviously are another story. Thanks, Andreas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
