From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C073FC77B7F for ; Wed, 17 May 2023 07:50:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230039AbjEQHuR (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 May 2023 03:50:17 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:47104 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229947AbjEQHuP (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 May 2023 03:50:15 -0400 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4641:c500::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA32F49CE; Wed, 17 May 2023 00:50:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 412ED64309; Wed, 17 May 2023 07:50:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EACE2C433EF; Wed, 17 May 2023 07:50:05 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1684309807; bh=gHbk0ucx0GMs+M8HKWhpclU1mbuhtBZOKMDwwu4F8tI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=dG++y/69d3XpBt+dgNygyDUAzm2BStjA9csCTpYrdI8FzqSy5UoRnm3WatqTpHRZB 23gnM1EEYhcU/7BzyHWfnYOPcJPVr7ndzMskofpC/eMzUhnaeaCLhb14+0tK4gkIAR /SEzDUvOO+ACaVk8tHw8pRKjmdk7Oy72PaZw41ctkV2BWYX4k1TEIQIrvE6SpUbXCS 82TBxbB3fAAwdo0WYFEg+vvsjsk1LczV/3aegA9cvGFqyrefL/R4uL/ennX7r/L74T odsA8OyeZWJIFGHZkCEXHI4r4jWonuHXgQMObRcIgkb25KOgehYCkDi8d+oY9BNgdM wqXrO8oH8RC0g== Date: Wed, 17 May 2023 09:50:02 +0200 From: Christian Brauner To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Jeff Layton , Ondrej Valousek , "trondmy@hammerspace.com" , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: A pass-through support for NFSv4 style ACL Message-ID: <20230517-outen-galopp-cf33633006b5@brauner> References: <20230516124655.82283-1-jlayton@kernel.org> <20230516-notorisch-geblickt-6b591fbd77c1@brauner> <20230517-herstellen-zitat-21eeccd36558@brauner> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 12:45:13AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 09:42:59AM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: > > I have no idea about the original flame war that ended RichACLs in > > additition to having no clear clue what RichACLs are supposed to > > achieve. My current knowledge extends to "Christoph didn't like them". > > Christoph certainly doesn't like Rich ACLs, as do many other people. > > But the deal block was that the patchset: > > - totally duplicated the VFS level ACL handling instead of having > a common object for Posix and the new ACLs Which seems like a pretty obvious choice... That was the first thing I thought of doing (see earlier mail). > - did add even more mess to the already horrible xattr interface > instead of adding syscalls. Plus that was before I moved POSIX ACLs out of the xattr handlers so they would've had to get that work done first for this to not end up a horrible horrible mess...