Re: [PATCH v8 00/41] Richacls

On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 08:45:40PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:

On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Christoph Hellwig [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 12:08:51AM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:

quoted

Hello,

here's another update of the richacl patch queue.  At this stage, I would
like to ask for final feedback so that the core and ext4 code (patches
1-19) can be merged in the 4.4 merge window.  The nfsd and nfs code should
then go through the respective maintainer trees.

Now way in this form even if everyone agrees we should have these
bastard ACLs.  I certainly disagree.

Well, thanks for having a look at the patches.

quoted

Ayway, back to the VFS <-> FS interface.  You still require tons of
boilderplate code in the filesystem which isn't required and we got rid
of for Posix ACLs.  The filesystem should not look at the userspace
xattr format, please follow a model similar to ->get_acl and ->set_acl
for Posix ACLs.

I will repost a version that has this cleaned up.

quoted

After that the wire up should be so trivial that you can wire up btrfs,
xfs and f2fs as well, which is important to make the feature mergeable.

Why would the patch queue become more mergeable by having support for
more filesystems in it? The filesystem specific code really isn't all
that interesting.

The hardest part for the filesystem support is the on-disk feature
flag that needs to be set. The kernel part of that is easy, but it's
an on-disk format change and so there's also all the userspace side
for mkfs, fsck, debug tools, etc, that also need to be able to parse
and understand it. So while the xattr code can be made much more
generic, there's a bunch of filesystem specific code that needs to
go into multiple different repositories and userspace packages for
this.

Andreas, I also can't remember if any xfstests have been written for
these ACLs? That would certainly help make sure all these
filesystems have equivalent behaviour...

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david-FqsqvQoI3Ljby3iVrkZq2A@public.gmane.org

On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 11:17 PM, Dave Chinner [off-list ref] wrote:

On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 08:45:40PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:

quoted

On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Christoph Hellwig [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

After that the wire up should be so trivial that you can wire up btrfs,
xfs and f2fs as well, which is important to make the feature mergeable.

Why would the patch queue become more mergeable by having support for
more filesystems in it? The filesystem specific code really isn't all
that interesting.

The hardest part for the filesystem support is the on-disk feature
flag that needs to be set. The kernel part of that is easy, but it's
an on-disk format change and so there's also all the userspace side
for mkfs, fsck, debug tools, etc, that also need to be able to parse
and understand it. So while the xattr code can be made much more
generic, there's a bunch of filesystem specific code that needs to
go into multiple different repositories and userspace packages for
this.

Yes.

Andreas, I also can't remember if any xfstests have been written for
these ACLs? That would certainly help make sure all these
filesystems have equivalent behaviour...

There's a reasonable amount of tests in the richacl user-space package
which are shell based, with a few small C helpers. We could move those
into xfstests eventually; now seems a bit early to me.

Thanks,
Andreas
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html