Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from fieldses.org ([174.143.236.118]:35536 "EHLO fieldses.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752875Ab1JSWU0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Oct 2011 18:20:26 -0400 Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 18:20:21 -0400 From: "J. Bruce Fields" To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Cc: agruen@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, dhowells@redhat.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH -V7 21/26] richacl: xattr mapping functions Message-ID: <20111019222021.GB1874@fieldses.org> References: <1318951981-5508-1-git-send-email-aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1318951981-5508-22-git-send-email-aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1318951981-5508-22-git-send-email-aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 09:02:56PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > +#define RICHACL_XATTR "system.richacl" > + > +struct richace_xattr { > + __le16 e_type; > + __le16 e_flags; > + __le32 e_mask; > + __le32 e_id; > + char e_who[0]; > +}; Does it really make sense to use a string here just to pick between the three choices OWNER@, GROUP@, and EVERYONE@? Why not just another small integer? Is the goal to expand this somehow eventually? --b.