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;
Date:   Wed, 28 Apr 2021 15:13:25 -0400
To:     Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@samsung.com>
Cc:     linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        smfrench@gmail.com, senozhatsky@chromium.org, hyc.lee@gmail.com,
        viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, hch@lst.de, hch@infradead.org,
        ronniesahlberg@gmail.com, aurelien.aptel@gmail.com,
        aaptel@suse.com, sandeen@sandeen.net, dan.carpenter@oracle.com,
        colin.king@canonical.com, rdunlap@infradead.org,
        willy@infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] cifsd: introduce new SMB3 kernel server
Message-ID: <20210428191325.GA7400@fieldses.org>
References: <CGME20210422003835epcas1p246c40c6a6bbc0e9f5d4ccf9b69bef0d7@epcas1p2.samsung.com>
 <20210422002824.12677-1-namjae.jeon@samsung.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210422002824.12677-1-namjae.jeon@samsung.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
From:   bfields@fieldses.org (J. Bruce Fields)
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 09:28:14AM +0900, Namjae Jeon wrote:
> ACLs                           Partially Supported. only DACLs available, SACLs
>                                (auditing) is planned for the future. For
>                                ownership (SIDs) ksmbd generates random subauth
>                                values(then store it to disk) and use uid/gid
>                                get from inode as RID for local domain SID.
>                                The current acl implementation is limited to
>                                standalone server, not a domain member.
>                                Integration with Samba tools is being worked on to
>                                allow future support for running as a domain member.

How exactly is this implementing ACLs?  I grepped through the code a bit
and couldn't quite figure it out--it looked like maybe it's both
converting to a POSIX ACL and storing the full SBM ACL in an xattr, is
that correct?  When you read an ACL, and both are present, which do you
use?

Also it looked like there's some code from fs/nfsd/nfs4acl.c, could we
share that somehow instead of copying?

--b.