On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 12:20:50AM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: > Bruce and all, > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:23 PM, J. Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > The following patches allow the umask to be ignored in the presence of > > inheritable NFSv4 ACLs. Otherwise inheritable ACLs can be rendered > > mostly useless whenever the umask masks out group bits. > > > > This solves a problem we've seen complaints about for some time, both > > upstream and from RHEL users. > > > > The new protocol has been discussed in the IETF working group and is > > documented at: > > > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-nfsv4-umask-02 > > > > It's unlikely that we'll discover problems requiring an incompatible > > change, so I think we should consider this for 4.10. > > the patches still refer to the new attribute as FATTR4_WORD2_UMASK which is > confusing. Can we please call it FATTR4_WORD2_MODE_UMASK as in the patches in > this series to better match what the attribute is called in > draft-ietf-nfsv4-umask-02. Thanks!--b. > > Other than refreshing the patches and renaming FATTR4_WORD2_UMASK to > FATTR4_WORD2_MODE_UMASK and NFS_CAP_UMASK to NFS_CAP_MODE_UMASK, the patches > here are the same. > > Thanks, > Andreas > > Andreas Gruenbacher (2): > nfs: add support for the umask attribute > nfsd: add support for the umask attribute > > fs/nfs/dir.c | 7 ++++++- > fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++----- > fs/nfs/nfs4xdr.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------ > fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++----- > fs/nfsd/nfsd.h | 9 +++++++-- > fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c | 4 ++-- > include/linux/nfs4.h | 1 + > include/linux/nfs_fs_sb.h | 1 + > include/linux/nfs_xdr.h | 2 ++ > 9 files changed, 80 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-) > > -- > 2.7.4 > -- 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
