From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Eric Van Hensbergen" Subject: Re: [PATCH] 9p: attach-per-user Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 09:20:23 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20070913044803.GC2675@ionkov.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: "Latchesar Ionkov" Return-path: Received: from nz-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.162.232]:18982 "EHLO nz-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754238AbXIMOUZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Sep 2007 10:20:25 -0400 Received: by nz-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id s18so406378nze for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 07:20:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20070913044803.GC2675@ionkov.net> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On 9/12/07, Latchesar Ionkov wrote: > > - allow only one user to access the tree (access=) > Only the user with uid can access the v9fs tree. Other users that attempt > to access it will get EPERM error. > While access= and dfltuid= creates an interesting flexibility in the way things can be used, I'm wondering if access= dfltuid=DEFAULT_UID is intuitive, it might be nice for the default behavior to be setting defltuid to the uid specified in access when that access option is used. This can be overridden with the dfltuid option, but I think it makes more sense to attach as the uid you are restricting access to. If that's the way we want to go, I think that can be handled in a separate patch. I've merged this stuff into my test tree, as soon as regressions pass and I confirm they compile clean on another architecture I'll push them into my devel to be picked up by -mm. -eric