On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 04:40:02PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > don't think it does, but I'm interested in the nfsd maintainers' > > opinions. > > This isn't something I've ever had a reason to care about. What are you > trying to fix exactly? The NFS MAY_ flags operate in the same name and number space and we'd easily get collisions when someone adds new MAY_ flags which miklos as well as at least two other independent efforts want to do. To sort this out we'd either defined the nfsd MAY_ flags in fs.h to make it obvious we should not double-allocates bits or names, or use a different name and number space for the nfsd flags. The first would be rather trivial but also ugly, the seconds sound much better but is a little more effort. Just defined NFSD_MAY_ and use it everywhere and do a little translation inside nfsd_permission before passing it on to permission(). > > --b. > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ ---end quoted text--- -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
