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  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, 13 Oct 2015 15:39:15 +0200
From:	Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@...hat.com>
To:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc:	Andreas Gr├╝nbacher <andreas.gruenbacher@...il.com>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
	Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...chiereds.net>,
	Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...marydata.com>,
	Anna Schumaker <anna.schumaker@...app.com>,
	linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>, xfs@....sgi.com,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux FS-devel Mailing List <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux API Mailing List <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 24/46] xfs: Add richacl support

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 6:05 AM, Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 03:51:15AM +0200, Andreas Gr├╝nbacher wrote:
>> 2015-10-12 2:10 GMT+02:00 Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>:
>> > Also, I really dislike the API where passing a NULL acl means to
>> > "set this acl" actually means "remove the existing ACL". Why no
>> > ->remove_acl method called from the generic code?
>>
>> It's not uncommon, it saves inode operations and wiring-up code.
>
> I know it's common. All it does is put extra branches in the
> filesystem code to do this, because remove is a different operation
> to set. The API sucks, and we're not limited on inode operations,
> and the operator overloading makes the filesystem code unnecessarily
> complex as it has to detect when to branch out ot remove or not...

I've tried it out. The filesystem code could be simplified (see the
richacl-wip [*] branch until the next posting). Adding a
remove_richacl inode operation on top of that really doesn't help.

Thanks,
Andreas

[*] git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/agruen/linux-richacl.git
richacl-wip
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists