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 bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EBC3C54EED for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 18:13:43 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=BS9sgtzdtCooiepbl3+QT3/OcJOo734LHL7dlXjSiNY=; b=COm/UFVXpPT5u2 dTgKF6aBnJ3m1AdWumTq86rhPtQpDt7HCAO2DTu8Tx05tEf71F9mUHGNPjAaFF+Cg7M+dUmYiEo0L rsEeSwc+qiPMFL0OokI8yf4Q3zCqVC4RxsFJZIhGb6xMcMEcMH2CFos1SOAZ944xAb0zTFv1Kr0KS FRgdPiwqeQAVYqW/MumqUrQ9GDz7K/oNhjscpYuQCTJFxTwIPp6vRcQDYnbw8i2dJ3GXrn1zuRZCv O9LbmOJwwIkHQdJIVt62+jXmhOGOe/xuLWK/ahBbE46p34gwrdbodpvubhaYxebn26wI9zzufbtyE 1L1iFKvmrcqMYzJCCLSQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1pMYeq-004t71-1p; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 18:13:32 +0000 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1pMYcj-004rt0-SO for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 18:11:24 +0000 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 524FF68BEB; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 10:16:15 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 10:16:15 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Christian Brauner Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig , Al Viro , Seth Forshee , linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org, Jan Kara , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com, reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/12] acl: remove remaining posix acl handlers Message-ID: <20230130091615.GB5178@lst.de> References: <20230125-fs-acl-remove-generic-xattr-handlers-v1-0-6cf155b492b6@kernel.org> <20230130091052.72zglqecqvom7hin@wittgenstein> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20230130091052.72zglqecqvom7hin@wittgenstein> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20230130_101122_116870_F6DE3AF1 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 15.45 ) X-BeenThere: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-mtd" Errors-To: linux-mtd-bounces+linux-mtd=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 10:10:52AM +0100, Christian Brauner wrote: > However, a few filesystems still rely on the ->list() method of the > generix POSIX ACL xattr handlers in their ->listxattr() inode operation. > This is a very limited set of filesystems. For most of them there is no > dependence on the generic POSIX ACL xattr handler in any way. > > In addition, during inode initalization in inode_init_always() the > registered xattr handlers in sb->s_xattr are used to raise IOP_XATTR in > inode->i_opflags. > > With the incoming removal of the legacy POSIX ACL handlers it is at > least possible for a filesystem to only implement POSIX ACLs but no > other xattrs. If that were to happen we would miss to raise IOP_XATTR > because sb->s_xattr would be NULL. While there currently is no such > filesystem we should still make sure that this just works should it ever > happen in the future. Now the real questions is: do we care? Once Posix ACLs use an entirely separate path, nothing should rely on IOP_XATTR for them. So instead I think we're better off auditing all users of IOP_XATTR and making sure that nothing relies on them for ACLs, as we've very much split the VFS concept of ACLs from that from xattrs otherwise. ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/