Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:43:20 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:43:02 -0500 Received: from rj.SGI.COM ([204.94.215.100]:58565 "EHLO rj.sgi.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:42:40 -0500 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 12:41:15 +1100 From: Nathan Scott To: "Stephen C. Tweedie" , Andreas Gruenbacher Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revised extended attributes interface Message-ID: <20011211124115.E70201@wobbly.melbourne.sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <20011205143209.C44610@wobbly.melbourne.sgi.com> <20011207202036.J2274@redhat.com> <20011208155841.A56289@wobbly.melbourne.sgi.com> <20011210115209.C1919@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20011210115209.C1919@redhat.com>; from sct@redhat.com on Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 11:52:09AM +0000 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 11:52:09AM +0000, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote: > Hi, > hi there Stephen. > On Sat, Dec 08, 2001 at 03:58:41PM +1100, Nathan Scott wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 07, 2001 at 08:20:36PM +0000, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote: > > > > > This is looking OK as far as EAs go. However, there is still no > > > mention of ACLs specifically, except an oblique reference to > > > "system.posix_acl_access". > > > > Yup - there's little mention of ACLs because they are only an > > optional, higher-level consumer of the API, & so didn't seem > > appropriate to document here. > > Unfortunately, if there are many filesystems wanting to use posix > ACLs, then standardising the API is still desirable. > Yes, absolutely. That is in fact a large driving force behind this effort to get a common EA and POSIX ACL API, and we are now for the first time at a point where we have multiple filesystems (xfs, ext2, and ext3) sharing the same API. The history went a bit like this: - an implementation of POSIX ACLs was written for ext2 and ext3 by Andreas; - an implementation of POSIX ACLs was ported for XFS (at the time, Andreas' implementation didn't allow us to use our pre-existing on-disk format from IRIX) - Andreas made attempt #1 to get a system call interface agreed on over a year ago now. He incorporated several peoples suggestions, but eventually the discussion got sidetracked, died and nothing further happened; - We were all _really_ hoping for something to come out of that, so we could then "standardise" on the various APIs involved; - [time passes, much pain is felt by lots of users - the patches have to continually track new kernels where the syscall table changes frequently break the user/kernel interface, affecting an increasing number of userspace applications] - After about a year of this, Andi gives us a kick in the pants, we contact Andreas and make a renewed effort at producing an API that we all can share. - Several iterations later, we have an initial implementation (which is not filesystem-specific for the first-time) - We made attempt #2 to get system call and VFS interfaces agreed on by posting to Linus, Al, various lists. We incorporate all the suggestions that we think make sense, and push out several iterations of the patches out. - We are all _really_ hoping for something to come out of this, so that we can "standardise" on the various APIs involved; - ...? > > We have implemented POSIX ACLs above this interface - > > But the ACL encoding is still hobbled: ... I have been on the acl-devel mailing list for a long time now, and while these features all sound like good ideas or interesting projects, I have never seen anyone post a patch or request any specific changes to Andreas' ACL encoding in that time. It seems to me that the relatively simple implementation which Andreas has done is a good starting point (it has been used in production for a long time now). His POSIX ACL encoding has a version field in it, so if/when some people step forward to implement these features you've described, and if they require changes to the format, then there should be no reason they can't do it cleanly and in a filesystem-independent manner, right? And if you do have reasons, its high time you sent Andreas some patches! ;-) Seriously though, from an XFS point of view, Andreas' current implementation is simple and meets all of our needs, he does a really good job of maintaining the code and is very responsive on the acl-devel list and to questions from us XFS folk, so we are quite happy to use his as the initial filesystem-independent implementation of POSIX ACLs for Linux. cheers. -- Nathan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/