[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bc56789f-7caa-45d8-814b-f9f169519959@linux.dev>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2025 13:55:25 +0800
From: ChenXiaoSong <chenxiaosong.chenxiaosong@...ux.dev>
To: Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@...nel.org>
Cc: stfrench@...rosoft.com, metze@...ba.org, pali@...nel.org,
smfrench@...il.com, sfrench@...ba.org, senozhatsky@...omium.org,
tom@...pey.com, pc@...guebit.org, ronniesahlberg@...il.com,
sprasad@...rosoft.com, bharathsm@...rosoft.com,
christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr, linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 13/22] smb: move file access permission bits
definitions to common/cifspdu.h
Should we move all file access permission bit definitions to
common/cifspdu.h?
Perhaps in the future we can change them to be the same.
On 10/20/25 1:27 PM, Namjae Jeon wrote:
>> +
>> +#define CLIENT_SET_FILE_READ_RIGHTS (FILE_READ_DATA | FILE_READ_EA | FILE_WRITE_EA \
>> + | FILE_READ_ATTRIBUTES \
>> + | FILE_WRITE_ATTRIBUTES \
>> + | DELETE | READ_CONTROL | WRITE_DAC \
>> + | WRITE_OWNER | SYNCHRONIZE)
>> +#define SERVER_SET_FILE_READ_RIGHTS (FILE_READ_DATA | FILE_READ_EA \
>> + | FILE_READ_ATTRIBUTES \
>> + | DELETE | READ_CONTROL | WRITE_DAC \
>> + | WRITE_OWNER | SYNCHRONIZE)
>> +#define CLIENT_SET_FILE_WRITE_RIGHTS (FILE_WRITE_DATA | FILE_APPEND_DATA \
>> + | FILE_READ_EA | FILE_WRITE_EA \
>> + | FILE_READ_ATTRIBUTES \
>> + | FILE_WRITE_ATTRIBUTES \
>> + | DELETE | READ_CONTROL | WRITE_DAC \
>> + | WRITE_OWNER | SYNCHRONIZE)
>> +#define SERVER_SET_FILE_WRITE_RIGHTS (FILE_WRITE_DATA | FILE_APPEND_DATA \
>> + | FILE_WRITE_EA \
>> + | FILE_DELETE_CHILD \
>> + | FILE_WRITE_ATTRIBUTES \
>> + | DELETE | READ_CONTROL | WRITE_DAC \
>> + | WRITE_OWNER | SYNCHRONIZE)
> What's the reason for moving it if the smb client and server don't share it?
--
Thanks,
ChenXiaoSong.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists