[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOssrKeWvYpgj4_cgsRBL_kTOHyRS-9_mfO9JHP-JahgqFnfHQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 10:00:25 +0100
From: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...hat.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Alban Crequy <alban@...volk.io>,
Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@...onical.com>,
Sargun Dhillon <sargun@...gun.me>,
Dongsu Park <dongsu@...volk.io>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 5/7] fuse: Simplfiy the posix acl handling logic.
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 12:53 AM, Eric W. Biederman
<ebiederm@...ssion.com> wrote:
> Rename the fuse connection flag posix_acl to cached_posix_acl as that
> is what it actually means. That fuse will cache and operate on the
> cached value of the posix acl.
>
> When fc->cached_posix_acl is not set, set ACL_DONT_CACHE on the inode
> so that get_acl and friends won't cache the acl values even if they
> are called.
>
> Replace forget_all_cached_acls with fuse_forget_cached_acls. This
> wrapper only takes effect when cached_posix_acl is true to prevent
> losing the nocache or noxattr status in when posix acls are not
> cached.
Shouldn't forget_cached_acl() be taught about ACL_DONT_CACHE? I think
it makes sense to generally not clear ACL_DONT_CACHE, since it's not
an actual acl value that needs forgetting.
Thanks,
Miklos
Powered by blists - more mailing lists