From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi0-f54.google.com ([209.85.218.54]:36375 "EHLO mail-oi0-f54.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752450AbcGATuC (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jul 2016 15:50:02 -0400 Received: by mail-oi0-f54.google.com with SMTP id f189so124544739oig.3 for ; Fri, 01 Jul 2016 12:50:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 14:49:59 -0500 From: Seth Forshee To: "Eric W. Biederman" , Michael j Theall , fuse-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Miklos Szeredi Subject: Re: [fuse-devel] [RFC] fuse: Support posix ACLs Message-ID: <20160701194959.GB67600@ubuntu-hedt> References: <20160629190731.GF53123@ubuntu-hedt> <87vb0rhhpr.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <87furt9mqz.fsf@thinkpad.rath.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87furt9mqz.fsf@thinkpad.rath.org> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 12:33:40PM -0700, Nikolaus Rath wrote: > On Jun 29 2016, ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote: > > "Michael j Theall" writes: > > > >> Going by the patch I posted a couple of years ago: > >> https://sourceforge.net/p/fuse/mailman/message/33033653/ > >> > >> The only hole I see in your patch is that in setattr() you are not > >> updating the cached acl if the ATTR_MODE is updated. The other major > >> difference is that my version uses the get_acl/set_acl inode > >> operations but you use that plus the xattr handlers. I'm not > >> up-to-speed on the kernel so I'm not sure if you actually need to > >> implement both. > > > > That makes an interesting question. Is it desirable to keep > > inode->i_mode in sync with the posix acls in fuse or should a filesystem > > that supports posix acls worry about that? > > A FUSE file system should be able to support ACLs without requiring the > file system process to do more than support extended attributes. I > believe this means that the kernel should keep i_mode and the ACLs in > sync -- it would be a rather bug prone and redundant for each FUSE file > system to implement its own parser for format in which the ACLs are > stored in xattrs. The most recent patch I posted keeps them in sync. Thanks, Seth