Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from e8.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.138]:41458 "EHLO e8.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751723Ab1JTIaM (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Oct 2011 04:30:12 -0400 From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" To: "J. Bruce Fields" 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 In-Reply-To: <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> <20111019222021.GB1874@fieldses.org> Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 14:00:02 +0530 Message-ID: <87k4805alx.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 18:20:21 -0400, "J. Bruce Fields" wrote: > 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? I guess Andreas wanted the disk layout to be able to store user@domain format if needed. That should make the layout flexible enough so that we won't have to add another xattr later. -aneesh