Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210325151823.572089-1-vgoyal@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210325151823.572089-1-vgoyal@redhat.com>
From:   Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Date:   Wed, 14 Apr 2021 13:57:01 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJfpegvU9zjT7qV=Rj4ok4kfYz-9BPhjp+xKz9odfSWaFxshyA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] fuse: Fix clearing SGID when access ACL is set
To:     Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Cc:     linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        virtio-fs-list <virtio-fs@redhat.com>,
        Luis Henriques <lhenriques@suse.de>,
        "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>,
        Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@canonical.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 4:19 PM Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> This is V2 of the patchset. Posted V1 here.
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20210319195547.427371-1-vgoyal@redhat.com/
>
> Changes since V1:
>
> - Dropped the helper to determine if SGID should be cleared and open
>   coded it instead. I will follow up on helper separately in a different
>   patch series. There are few places already which open code this, so
>   for now fuse can do the same. Atleast I can make progress on this
>   and virtiofs can enable ACL support.
>
> Luis reported that xfstests generic/375 fails with virtiofs. Little
> debugging showed that when posix access acl is set that in some
> cases SGID needs to be cleared and that does not happen with virtiofs.
>
> Setting posix access acl can lead to mode change and it can also lead
> to clear of SGID. fuse relies on file server taking care of all
> the mode changes. But file server does not have enough information to
> determine whether SGID should be cleared or not.
>
> Hence this patch series add support to send a flag in SETXATTR message
> to tell server to clear SGID.

Changed it to have a single extended structure for the request, which
is how this has always been handled in the fuse API.

The ABI is unchanged, but you'll need to update the userspace part
according to the API change.  Otherwise looks good.

Applied and pushed to fuse.git#for-next.

Thanks,
Miklos