On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 09:17:16AM +0100, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: > POSIX ACLs and richacls are both objects allocated by kmalloc() with a > reference count which are freed by kfree_rcu(). An inode can either > cache an access and a default POSIX ACL, or a richacl (richacls do not > have default acls). To allow an inode to cache either of the two kinds > of acls, introduce a new base_acl type and convert i_acl and > i_default_acl to that type. In most cases, the vfs then doesn't care which > kind of acl an inode caches (if any). This base_acl object is pointless. I've asked in the past to have a proper container for the ACLs in common code, but a union of a refcount and a rcu head doesn't really fit that category. But this points out that the f2fs folks really need a couple of slaps on their hands. Not if generic funtionality doesn't fit your needs you are not going to blindly copy and paste it, please talk to find a solution instead of duplicating it. Folks, please come up with a suggestion to get rid of f2fs_acl_clone, f2fs_acl_create_masq and f2fs_acl_create ASAP. -- 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
