[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87zki99ih1.fsf@skywalker.in.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 09:55:30 +0530
From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, agruen@...nel.org, bfields@...ldses.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -V6 25/26] ext4: Implement rich acl for ext4
On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 13:45:58 +0100, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> wrote:
> Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > + retval = ext4_set_richacl(handle, inode, acl);
> > + ext4_journal_stop(handle);
> > + if (retval == ENOSPC && ext4_should_retry_alloc(inode->i_sb, &retries))
> > + goto retry;
>
> Should that be -ENOSPC?
Fixed
>
> I do wonder, why does ext4 need to know about richacls at all? Surely, as far
> as ext4 is concerned, they should be seen as xattrs?
>
richacl related changes to ext4 is minimal. They mostly are to call
necessary permission check functions and to map xattr to richacl
structure.
> If ext4 needs a mark on disk to say it supports richacls, then why can't that
> simply be the presence or lack thereof of a richacl on the root dir?
>
I have a patch in the full series which enable richacl on ext4 file system
based on ext4 compatibility flags. I didn't add that as a part of this
series to enable easy testing. The goal is to use tune2fs to enable
richacl and them the mount option -o acl enable richacl/posix acl
accordingly.
-aneesh
--
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