Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:     Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
Cc:     lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Containers <containers@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Alban Crequy <alban@kinvolk.io>,
        Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@canonical.com>,
        Sargun Dhillon <sargun@sargun.me>,
        Dongsu Park <dongsu@kinvolk.io>,
        "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>
References: <87po4rz4ui.fsf_-_@xmission.com>
        <20180226235302.12708-5-ebiederm@xmission.com>
        <CAOssrKeWvYpgj4_cgsRBL_kTOHyRS-9_mfO9JHP-JahgqFnfHQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 02 Mar 2018 15:49:56 -0600
In-Reply-To: <CAOssrKeWvYpgj4_cgsRBL_kTOHyRS-9_mfO9JHP-JahgqFnfHQ@mail.gmail.com>
        (Miklos Szeredi's message of "Tue, 27 Feb 2018 10:00:25 +0100")
Message-ID: <87fu5i9mgr.fsf@xmission.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 5/7] fuse: Simplfiy the posix acl handling logic.
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com> writes:

> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 12:53 AM, Eric W. Biederman
> <ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote:
>> Rename the fuse connection flag posix_acl to cached_posix_acl as that
>> is what it actually means.  That fuse will cache and operate on the
>> cached value of the posix acl.
>>
>> When fc->cached_posix_acl is not set, set ACL_DONT_CACHE on the inode
>> so that get_acl and friends won't cache the acl values even if they
>> are called.
>>
>> Replace forget_all_cached_acls with fuse_forget_cached_acls.  This
>> wrapper only takes effect when cached_posix_acl is true to prevent
>> losing the nocache or noxattr status in when posix acls are not
>> cached.
>
> Shouldn't forget_cached_acl() be taught about ACL_DONT_CACHE?  I think
> it makes sense to generally not clear ACL_DONT_CACHE, since it's not
> an actual acl value that needs forgetting.

After stopping to make certain I understand the issues, I don't think
it makes sense to teach forget_cached_acl about ACL_DONT_CACHE.

If you are fogetting a cached attribute ACL_DONT_CACHE simply doesn't
make sense.

Further it makes sense to cache a negative result for fuse when
!fc->no_getxattr.  Even if you would ordinarily not cache posix acls.

So I think the better plan is to teach the posix acl code how to not
cache results on a case by case basis.  As I did in my rfc patch I
posted a little earlier today.  That works with forget_cached_acl and it
supports local reasoning.  Further while the performance might not be as
good as ACL_DONT_CACHE I don't think that matters as always going to the
fuse server to get acls is almost certainly going to dominate the acl
costs.

Eric