linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Ceph updates for -rc1

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 28 Jan 2014 13:48:05 -0800
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, Sage Weil <sage@...tank.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Guangliang Zhao <lucienchao@...il.com>,
	Li Wang <li.wang@...ntykylin.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Ceph updates for -rc1

On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> This breaks the build for me.

It is my merge (Christoph's ACL changes came in today through the VFS
tree from Al).

I was doing the merges today on my laptop (I had jury duty yesterday
and today), and so I didn't do the allmodconfig build I would normally
do on my (much faster) desktop. Well, actually I did do the full fs
builds for the earlier pulls that actually had some conflicts, but not
for the ceph pull. The conflict was hidden by the fact that the whole
cifs ACL support is new, so there was no data conflict, just a silent
semantic conflict between the new smarter ACL helpers and the new ACL
use in CIFS.

I'm back home now (yay, all the afternoon cases got settled), and I
see the problem now. I should have done an allmodconfig build
immediately after coming home, but I never even thought of it.

Anyway, here's an *untested* conversion to the new posix acl helper
infrastructure. I do wonder if ceph_init_acl() could be converted to
posix_acl_create(), right now that part is a "non-conversion" - it's
just made to use __posix_acl_create() that implements the old
interface.

Al, Christoph, can you please check my conversion for sanity from a
generic posix-acl standpoint?

Sage, Guangliang, Li, can you check the actual cifs usage/sanity of
the attached patch?

Sorry about the messed-up merge. Although I also blame Al, because
he's horrible about having his changes in linux-next, so nobody was
ever really aware of this semantic conflict.

Al. Bad, bad boy. Consider yourself hit with a rolled-up newspaper.

                 Linus

View attachment "patch.diff" of type "text/plain" (4685 bytes)