Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754265Ab1CBPuB (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Mar 2011 10:50:01 -0500 Received: from fieldses.org ([174.143.236.118]:42835 "EHLO fieldses.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750959Ab1CBPt7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Mar 2011 10:49:59 -0500 Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 10:49:43 -0500 From: "J. Bruce Fields" To: "Aneesh Kumar K. V" Cc: "Ted Ts'o" , sfrench@us.ibm.com, agruen@linbit.com, dilger.kernel@dilger.ca, sandeen@redhat.com, jlayton@redhat.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH -V5 00/24] New ACL format for better NFSv4 acl interoperability Message-ID: <20110302154943.GB29136@fieldses.org> References: <1298469131-16555-1-git-send-email-aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20110228211145.GG28617@thunk.org> <87oc5vgwqr.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87oc5vgwqr.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1981 Lines: 53 On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 12:20:36PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K. V wrote: > On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 16:11:45 -0500, "Ted Ts'o" wrote: > > Hi Aneesh, > > > > What is the current status of this patch series? I seem to remember > > that Christoph and Al Viro had some objections; have those been > > cleared yet? If not, can you summarize what their objections are? > > The main objection raised was the use of may_delete and may_create inode > operations callback. They are gone now and we have MAY_* flags as > favoured by Al Viro. The new MAY_* flags added are > > #define MAY_CREATE_FILE 128 > #define MAY_CREATE_DIR 256 > #define MAY_DELETE_CHILD 512 > #define MAY_DELETE_SELF 1024 > #define MAY_TAKE_OWNERSHIP 2048 > #define MAY_CHMOD 4096 > #define MAY_SET_TIMES 8192 > > > > > > To be honest I haven't been paying super close attention to this patch > > series, and I'm curious what needs to happen with it one way or > > another. > > > > IMHO we are ready to get first 11 patches upstream in the next merge > window. ie the below set of patches. Why aren't all of them ready? --b. > > vfs: Make acl_permission_check() work for richacls > vfs: Add permission flags for setting file attributes > vfs: Make the inode passed to inode_change_ok non-const > vfs: Add delete child and delete self permission flags > vfs: Add new file and directory create permission flags > vfs: Optimize out IS_RICHACL() if CONFIG_FS_RICHACL is not defined > vfs: Add IS_RICHACL() test for richacl support > vfs: Add generic IS_ACL() test for acl support > vfs: Add a comment to inode_permission() > vfs: Pass all mask flags down to iop->check_acl > vfs: Indicate that the permission functions take all the MAY_* flags > > -aneesh -- 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/