From: "Aneesh Kumar K. V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
Cc: bfields@fieldses.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nfs: Set MS_POSIXACL always
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 12:10:38 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3fwtw297d.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1292521792.2912.49.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org>
On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 12:49:52 -0500, Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-12-16 at 22:45 +0530, Aneesh Kumar K. V wrote:
> > Any update on this ?
> >
> > -aneesh
> >
> > On Thu, 9 Dec 2010 17:05:14 +0530, "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > We want to skip VFS applying mode for NFS. So set MS_POSIXACL always
> > > and selectively use umask. Ideally we would want to use umask only
> > > when we don't have inheritable ACEs set. But NFS currently don't
> > > allow to send umask to the server. So this is best what we can do
> > > and this is consistent with NFSv3
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > > ---
> > > fs/nfs/dir.c | 3 +--
> > > fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c | 5 +++++
> > > fs/nfs/super.c | 10 ++++++++++
> > > 3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/nfs/super.c b/fs/nfs/super.c
> > > index 3c04504..e57e670 100644
> > > --- a/fs/nfs/super.c
> > > +++ b/fs/nfs/super.c
> > > @@ -2508,6 +2513,11 @@ static void nfs4_fill_super(struct super_block *sb)
> > > {
> > > sb->s_time_gran = 1;
> > > sb->s_op = &nfs4_sops;
> > > + /*
> > > + * The VFS shouldn't apply the umask to mode bits. We will do
> > > + * so ourselves when necessary.
> > > + */
> > > + sb->s_flags |= MS_POSIXACL;
> > > nfs_initialise_sb(sb);
> > > }
>
> Won't this end up possibly turning on ACL checking in
> acl_permission_check()?
acl_permission_check get called only when we don't define an
inode->permission callback. In case of nfs client we do define
nfs_permission callback. In case we don't define a access NFS proto
callback we are still ok because in that case we want mode based
validation and we do pass check_acl as NULL
-aneesh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-12-17 6:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-12-09 11:35 [PATCH] nfs: Set MS_POSIXACL always Aneesh Kumar K.V
2010-12-16 17:15 ` Aneesh Kumar K. V
2010-12-16 17:49 ` Trond Myklebust
2010-12-17 6:40 ` Aneesh Kumar K. V [this message]
2011-01-03 16:04 ` Aneesh Kumar K. V
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=m3fwtw297d.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).