Re: [GIT PULL] Ceph updates for -rc1

Sage Weil
2014-01-29T06:08:24Z

Hi Linus,

On Tue, 28 Jan 2014, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > This breaks the build for me.
>
> It is my merge (Christoph's ACL changes came in today through the VFS
> tree from Al).
>
> I was doing the merges today on my laptop (I had jury duty yesterday
> and today), and so I didn't do the allmodconfig build I would normally
> do on my (much faster) desktop. Well, actually I did do the full fs
> builds for the earlier pulls that actually had some conflicts, but not
> for the ceph pull. The conflict was hidden by the fact that the whole
> cifs ACL support is new, so there was no data conflict, just a silent
> semantic conflict between the new smarter ACL helpers and the new ACL
> use in CIFS.

s/cifs/ceph/ :)

> I'm back home now (yay, all the afternoon cases got settled), and I
> see the problem now. I should have done an allmodconfig build
> immediately after coming home, but I never even thought of it.
>
> Anyway, here's an *untested* conversion to the new posix acl helper
> infrastructure. I do wonder if ceph_init_acl() could be converted to
> posix_acl_create(), right now that part is a "non-conversion" - it's
> just made to use __posix_acl_create() that implements the old
> interface.
>
> Al, Christoph, can you please check my conversion for sanity from a
> generic posix-acl standpoint?
>
> Sage, Guangliang, Li, can you check the actual cifs usage/sanity of
> the attached patch?

Superficially at least the conversion looks okay to me, but it's not
passing my smoke test (it's giving me EOPNOTSUPP for chmod and setxattr
when setting an ACL). I'll look at it tomorrow if Guangliang, Li, or Yan
don't get there first.

I should have caught this before--I knew the ACL changes were coming and
forgot to check the merged build beforehand!

sage