Re: [PATCH -V2 00/16] New ACL format for better NFSv4 acl interoperability

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 12:11:53 +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tuesday 20 July 2010 11:31:07 Aneesh Kumar K. V wrote:
> > We need to update ACL4_VALID_FLAGS to now consider ACL4_MASKED as a
> > valid flag.  This is also needed for userspace.
> 
> Good point, I missed that.

I updated the patch and will push the change to korg after running some
test.

> 
> > On a related note, should we move ACL4_MASKED and ACL4_POSIX_MAPPED to
> > be the higher bits ? That would make sure we will be able to accomodate
> > new flag value NFSv4 define.
> 
> That makes sense, except that ACL4_POSIX_MAPPED hasn't entered the scene in 
> the patches posted here, and I'm still not convinced that we'll actually need 
> it.
> 

The userspace change did result in a different output for the below ex:

richacl --set 'flags:a 101:w::deny 101:rw::allow 101:w:a:deny 101:rw:a:allow' f

this now gives

/mnt/d# richacl  --get --numeric  f
f:
 flags:a
   101:-w-----------::deny
   101:rw-----------::allow
   101:-w-----------:a:deny
   101:rw-----------:a:allow

that 'w' in rw::allow is redundant, because we have a deny entry before.

-aneesh
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux