From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] move xattr permission checks into the VFS
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 04:38:15 +0100
Message-ID: <20051101033815.GA24605@lst.de>
References: <20051101023019.GB23378@lst.de> <1130815329.19963.8.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20051101032451.GA24312@lst.de> <1130816004.19963.16.camel@lade.trondhjem.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: akpm@osdl.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Return-path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.210]:46251 "EHLO mail.lst.de")
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932558AbVKADiV (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:38:21 -0500
To: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1130816004.19963.16.camel@lade.trondhjem.org>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 10:33:23PM -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> ...but then I'm a bit confused w.r.t. your removal of the checks for
> S_ISREG(inode->i_mode) & friends in nfs4proc.c nfs4_setxattr(). You
> motivate the removal by the fact that you've moved those checks into the
> VFS, but AFAICS we will never hit the VFS checks for the case of
> system.nfs4_acl (which is the only case we care about right now).

Hmm, that's was at least half of an oversight.  The other filesystems
do exactly this check only for user ACLs. Posix ACLs are supported
on all files but links and in the other filesystems these link checks
are hidden much deeper in the callchanin.

If this check is the right thing for NFSv4 ACLs we should drop the nfs
patch.