On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 04:45:02PM -0700, Frank Filz wrote: > We have been doing some extensive testing of Linux support for ACLs on > NFDS v4. We have noticed that the server rejects ACLs where the groups > are out of order, for example, the following ACL is rejected: > > A::OWNER@:rwaxtTcCy > A::user101@domain:rwaxtcy > A::GROUP@:rwaxtcy > A:g:group102@domain:rwaxtcy > A:g:group101@domain:rwaxtcy > A::EVERYONE@:rwaxtcy > > Examining the server code, I found that after converting an NFS v4 ACL > to POSIX, sort_pacl is called to sort the user ACEs and group ACEs. > Unfortunately, a minor bug causes the group sort to be skipped. Good grief, I'm embarassed--OK, thanks for catching that! Do you have any regression tests that'd be easy for someone else to run? Applied. --b. > > Signed-off-by: Frank Filz <ffilzlnx@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > fs/nfsd/nfs4acl.c | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4acl.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4acl.c > index 725d02f..6d9c6aa 100644 > --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4acl.c > +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4acl.c > @@ -389,7 +389,7 @@ sort_pacl(struct posix_acl *pacl) > sort_pacl_range(pacl, 1, i-1); > > BUG_ON(pacl->a_entries[i].e_tag != ACL_GROUP_OBJ); > - j = i++; > + j = ++i; > while (pacl->a_entries[j].e_tag == ACL_GROUP) > j++; > sort_pacl_range(pacl, i, j-1); > -- > 1.5.2.2 > > > > _______________________________________________ > NFSv4 mailing list > NFSv4@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://linux-nfs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
