Hi kernel maintainers,
Please help to submit the following patch into kernel
---
Signed-off-by: Ondrej Valousek <[email protected]>
Short description:
The XATTR_NAME_NFSV4_ACL definition is also useful for userspace (i.e. nfs4_acl_tools/libacl/coreutils)
so makes a sense to move the definition to the linux/xattr.h
diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
index e2efcd26336c..07c3d8572912 100644
--- a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
+++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
@@ -7680,8 +7680,6 @@ nfs4_release_lockowner(struct nfs_server *server, struct nfs4_lock_state *lsp)
rpc_call_async(server->client, &msg, 0, &nfs4_release_lockowner_ops, data);
}
-#define XATTR_NAME_NFSV4_ACL "system.nfs4_acl"
-
static int nfs4_xattr_set_nfs4_acl(const struct xattr_handler *handler,
struct user_namespace *mnt_userns,
struct dentry *unused, struct inode *inode,
diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/xattr.h b/include/uapi/linux/xattr.h
index 9463db2dfa9d..77eb8c885861 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/xattr.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/xattr.h
@@ -81,5 +81,7 @@
#define XATTR_POSIX_ACL_DEFAULT "posix_acl_default"
#define XATTR_NAME_POSIX_ACL_DEFAULT XATTR_SYSTEM_PREFIX XATTR_POSIX_ACL_DEFAULT
+#define XATTR_NFSV4_ACL "nfs4_acl"
+#define XATTR_NAME_NFSV4_ACL XATTR_SYSTEM_PREFIX XATTR_NFSV4_ACL
#endif /* _UAPI_LINUX_XATTR_H */
On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 07:43:58AM +0000, Ondrej Valousek wrote:
> Hi kernel maintainers,
>
> Please help to submit the following patch into kernel
Well, for that a proper formatted mail really helps.
And these identifiers do not belong into xattr.h. They are a
non-sanctioned NFS side API, not a VFS API.
Hi Christoph,
> Well, for that a proper formatted mail really helps.
Yeah for the first main I used Outlook to send, the second email with patch was sent directly using GIT so should be formatted well.
Sorry I am beginner here.
> And these identifiers do not belong into xattr.h. They are a non-sanctioned NFS side API, not a VFS API.
Ah yes, I forgot about VFS, true. What is the best place to keep them then?
Or is it a big issue to extend VFS with them?
I mean NFSv4 - style ACLs are IMHO even better than Posix ACLs - if not for anything else then because Posix ACLs have never been ratified - maybe we'll see them on local FS at some stage, too.
Thanks,
Ondrej
-----Original Message-----
From: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
Sent: pond?l? 31. ??jna 2022 9:03
To: Ondrej Valousek <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Chuck Lever III <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] nfs: Move ACL xattr definitions to linux/xattr.h
On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 07:43:58AM +0000, Ondrej Valousek wrote:
> Hi kernel maintainers,
>
> Please help to submit the following patch into kernel
Well, for that a proper formatted mail really helps.
And these identifiers do not belong into xattr.h. They are a non-sanctioned NFS side API, not a VFS API.