Re: [RFC] Apply the umask in VFS optionally (also POSIX ACL kernel infrastructure)

[Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>]

On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 01:41:28PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> Well, the previous macro was IS_POSIX_ACL(inode); it was testing a super block 
> flag. We had an additional s_xattr_flags in the super block:

XFS tree is currently a little different:

--- 2.4.19-xfs/include/linux/fs.h
+++ 2.4.19-xfs/include/linux/fs.h
@@ -135,6 +135,7 @@
 #define S_IMMUTABLE	16	/* Immutable file */
 #define S_DEAD		32	/* removed, but still open directory */
 #define S_NOQUOTA	64	/* Inode is not counted to quota */
+#define S_POSIXACL	128	/* Defer applying umask to mode bits */
 
 /*
  * Note that nosuid etc flags are inode-specific: setting some file-system
@@ -163,6 +164,7 @@
 #define IS_NODIRATIME(inode)	__IS_FLG(inode, MS_NODIRATIME)
 
 #define IS_DEADDIR(inode)	((inode)->i_flags & S_DEAD)
+#define IS_POSIXACL(inode)	((inode)->i_flags & S_POSIXACL)
 
 /* the read-only stuff doesn't really belong here, but any other place is
    probably as bad and I don't want to create yet another include file. */
 

Id on't like the per-inode thinkgy, though.  A per-superblock flag
(without s_xattr_flags) is most reasonable in my eyes.