Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 09:44:41PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
>> From: Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> A richacl consists of an NFSv4 acl and an owner, group, and other mask.
>> These three masks correspond to the owner, group, and other file
>> permission bits, but they contain NFSv4 permissions instead of POSIX
>> permissions.
>>
>> Each entry in the NFSv4 acl applies to the file owner (OWNER@), the
>> owning group (GROUP@), literally everyone (EVERYONE@), or to a specific
>> uid or gid.
>>
>> As in the standard POSIX file permission model, each process is the
>> owner, group, or other file class. A richacl grants a requested access
>> only if the NFSv4 acl in the richacl grants the access (according to the
>> NFSv4 permission check algorithm), and the file mask that applies to the
>> process includes the requested permissions.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ....
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * richace_is_same_identifier - are both identifiers the same?
>> + */
>> +int
>> +richace_is_same_identifier(const struct richace *a, const struct richace *b)
>> +{
>> +#define WHO_FLAGS (ACE4_SPECIAL_WHO | ACE4_IDENTIFIER_GROUP)
>> + if ((a->e_flags & WHO_FLAGS) != (b->e_flags & WHO_FLAGS))
>> + return 0;
>> + return a->e_id == b->e_id;
>> +#undef WHO_FLAGS
>
> Ugh.
>
> ....
Will remove.
>
>> +#define richacl_for_each_entry(_ace, _acl) \
>> + for (_ace = _acl->a_entries; \
>> + _ace != _acl->a_entries + _acl->a_count; \
>> + _ace++)
>> +
>> +#define richacl_for_each_entry_reverse(_ace, _acl) \
>> + for (_ace = _acl->a_entries + _acl->a_count - 1; \
>> + _ace != _acl->a_entries - 1; \
>> + _ace--)
>
> somewhat lacking in ()...
Will add
>
>> +/* Flag values defined by rich-acl */
>> +#define ACL4_MASKED 0x80
>> +
>> +#define ACL4_VALID_FLAGS ( \
>> + ACL4_MASKED)
>> +
>> +/* e_type values */
>> +#define ACE4_ACCESS_ALLOWED_ACE_TYPE 0x0000
>> +#define ACE4_ACCESS_DENIED_ACE_TYPE 0x0001
>> +/*#define ACE4_SYSTEM_AUDIT_ACE_TYPE 0x0002*/
>> +/*#define ACE4_SYSTEM_ALARM_ACE_TYPE 0x0003*/
>
> What's with all the commented out types?
>
These are NFSv4 ACL ACE types which we are not implementing. Just left
it there for documentation.
-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
