Any update on this ?
-aneesh
On Thu, 9 Dec 2010 17:05:14 +0530, "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> We want to skip VFS applying mode for NFS. So set MS_POSIXACL always
> and selectively use umask. Ideally we would want to use umask only
> when we don't have inheritable ACEs set. But NFS currently don't
> allow to send umask to the server. So this is best what we can do
> and this is consistent with NFSv3
>
> Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/nfs/dir.c | 3 +--
> fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c | 5 +++++
> fs/nfs/super.c | 10 ++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfs/dir.c b/fs/nfs/dir.c
> index 8ea4a41..070f368 100644
> --- a/fs/nfs/dir.c
> +++ b/fs/nfs/dir.c
> @@ -1361,8 +1361,7 @@ static struct dentry *nfs_atomic_lookup(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry
> if (nd->flags & LOOKUP_CREATE) {
> attr.ia_mode = nd->intent.open.create_mode;
> attr.ia_valid = ATTR_MODE;
> - if (!IS_POSIXACL(dir))
> - attr.ia_mode &= ~current_umask();
> + attr.ia_mode &= ~current_umask();
> } else {
> open_flags &= ~(O_EXCL | O_CREAT);
> attr.ia_valid = 0;
> diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
> index 6a653ff..c57b4e0 100644
> --- a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
> +++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
> @@ -2486,6 +2486,7 @@ nfs4_proc_create(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, struct iattr *sattr,
> path = &ctx->path;
> fmode = ctx->mode;
> }
> + sattr->ia_mode &= ~current_umask();
> state = nfs4_do_open(dir, path, fmode, flags, sattr, cred);
> d_drop(dentry);
> if (IS_ERR(state)) {
> @@ -2816,6 +2817,8 @@ static int nfs4_proc_mkdir(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry,
> {
> struct nfs4_exception exception = { };
> int err;
> +
> + sattr->ia_mode &= ~current_umask();
> do {
> err = nfs4_handle_exception(NFS_SERVER(dir),
> _nfs4_proc_mkdir(dir, dentry, sattr),
> @@ -2916,6 +2919,8 @@ static int nfs4_proc_mknod(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry,
> {
> struct nfs4_exception exception = { };
> int err;
> +
> + sattr->ia_mode &= ~current_umask();
> do {
> err = nfs4_handle_exception(NFS_SERVER(dir),
> _nfs4_proc_mknod(dir, dentry, sattr, rdev),
> diff --git a/fs/nfs/super.c b/fs/nfs/super.c
> index 3c04504..e57e670 100644
> --- a/fs/nfs/super.c
> +++ b/fs/nfs/super.c
> @@ -2498,6 +2498,11 @@ static void nfs4_clone_super(struct super_block *sb,
> sb->s_maxbytes = old_sb->s_maxbytes;
> sb->s_time_gran = 1;
> sb->s_op = old_sb->s_op;
> + /*
> + * The VFS shouldn't apply the umask to mode bits. We will do
> + * so ourselves when necessary.
> + */
> + sb->s_flags |= MS_POSIXACL;
> nfs_initialise_sb(sb);
> }
>
> @@ -2508,6 +2513,11 @@ static void nfs4_fill_super(struct super_block *sb)
> {
> sb->s_time_gran = 1;
> sb->s_op = &nfs4_sops;
> + /*
> + * The VFS shouldn't apply the umask to mode bits. We will do
> + * so ourselves when necessary.
> + */
> + sb->s_flags |= MS_POSIXACL;
> nfs_initialise_sb(sb);
> }
>
> --
> 1.7.1
>
--
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
