[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080529204002.GC24018@fieldses.org>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 16:40:02 -0400
From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc: hch@...radead.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
viro@...IV.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
neilb@...e.de
Subject: Re: [patch 4/8] nfsd: rename MAY_ flags
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 04:02:39PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > From: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...e.cz>
> > >
> > > Rename nfsd specific MAY_* flags to NFSD_MAY_* to make it clear, that
> > > these are not used outside nfsd, and to avoid namespace conflicts with
> > > the VFS.
> >
> > But they _are_ in the same namespace as the VFS ones. This needs to be
> > sorted out by real by understanding what's going on here and either
> > separating this flags out and passing them in a separate argument, or
> > moving them to include/linux/fs.h so it's obvious for anyone adding new
> > flags that they must not collide.
>
> Neither I think. What's going on is that nfsd has a private set of
> permission flags, and a private permission checking function, which
> incidentally calls the vfs' permission checking function.
>
> Does it hurt to share the three base MAY_ flags for this purpose? I
> don't think it does, but I'm interested in the nfsd maintainers'
> opinions.
This isn't something I've ever had a reason to care about. What are you
trying to fix exactly?
--b.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists