public inbox for linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@suse.de>
Cc: Linux-FSDevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] POSIX ACL kernel infrastructure
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2002 15:33:49 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020804153349.A28109@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200208041614.47152.agruen@suse.de>; from agruen@suse.de on Sun, Aug 04, 2002 at 04:14:47PM +0200

On Sun, Aug 04, 2002 at 04:14:47PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Andreas Gruenbacher <a.gruenbacher@computer.org>");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Generic Posix Access Control List (ACL) Manipulation");
> +#if LINUX_VERSION_CODE >= KERNEL_VERSION(2,4,0)
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> +#endif

MODULE_LICENSE was new in 2.4.9 or 2.4.10, but certainly not present in
2.4.1..  I don't think kernel version checks in core code are a good idea
though.  especially if you aim for inclusion.

> +posix_acl_t *
> +posix_acl_alloc(int count)
> +{
> +	const size_t size = sizeof(posix_acl_t) +
> +	                    count * sizeof(posix_acl_entry_t);
> +	posix_acl_t *acl = kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (acl) {
> +		atomic_set(&acl->a_refcount, 1);
> +		acl->a_count = count;
> +	}
> +	return acl;

are you sure this is never called from filsystem transactions?
passing a gfp flag down seems like a good idea to me.

> +/*
> + * Duplicate an ACL handle.
> + */
> +posix_acl_t *
> +posix_acl_dup(posix_acl_t *acl)
> +{
> +	if (acl)
> +		atomic_inc(&acl->a_refcount);
> +	return acl;
> +}

Make this an inline in a header?  can acl really be NULL?

> +/*
> + * Get the POSIX ACL of an inode.
> + */
> +posix_acl_t *
> +get_posix_acl(struct inode *inode, int type)
> +{
> +	posix_acl_t *acl;
> +
> +	if (!inode->i_op || !inode->i_op->get_posix_acl)
> +		return ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUP);

inode->i_op is never NULL.

> +	down(&inode->i_sem);
> +	lock_kernel();  /* goes away in 2.5.x */

this patch _is_ for 2.5, isn't it?

> linux-2.5.30.patch/include/linux/fs.h
> --- linux-2.5.30/include/linux/fs.h	Thu Aug  1 23:16:15 2002
> +++ linux-2.5.30.patch/include/linux/fs.h	Sun Aug  4 13:29:31 2002
> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@
>  #include <linux/string.h>
>  #include <linux/radix-tree.h>
>  #include <linux/bitops.h>
> +#include <linux/posix_acl.h>
>  
>  #include <asm/atomic.h>
>  
> @@ -787,6 +788,8 @@
>  	ssize_t (*getxattr) (struct dentry *, const char *, void *, size_t);
>  	ssize_t (*listxattr) (struct dentry *, char *, size_t);
>  	int (*removexattr) (struct dentry *, const char *);
> +	posix_acl_t *(*get_posix_acl) (struct inode *, int);
> +	int (*set_posix_acl) (struct inode *, int, posix_acl_t *);

If you had followed Documentation/CodingSyle and use struct osix_acl
instead of posix_acl_t we wouldn't have to bloat fs.h with yet another
indirect header..

Also what exactly are get_posix_acl/set_posix_acl for?  We have wrappers
for them in fs/posix_acl.c, but even in your 2.4 patch only get_posix_acl
is ever used.  Shouldn't we always set/get posix ACLs through the xattr
inode operations?
 
> +#ifdef __KERNEL__

why the __KERNEL__?  

> +/* pxacl.c */

Shouldn't this be posix_acl.c?


  reply	other threads:[~2002-08-04 14:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-08-04 13:46 [RFC] POSIX ACL kernel infrastructure Andreas Gruenbacher
2002-08-04 14:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2002-08-04 14:14   ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2002-08-04 14:33     ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2002-08-05 12:11       ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2002-08-05 12:28         ` Christoph Hellwig
2002-08-09  2:02           ` Nathan Scott
2002-08-09 10:53             ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2002-08-09 11:15               ` Christoph Hellwig
2002-08-09 12:22                 ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2002-08-09 12:32                   ` Christoph Hellwig
2002-08-09 13:17                     ` Andreas Gruenbacher

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20020804153349.A28109@infradead.org \
    --to=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=agruen@suse.de \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox