Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:63107 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751955Ab3J0Sb2 (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Oct 2013 14:31:28 -0400 Subject: Re: XATTRs in NFS? From: Simo Sorce To: "Myklebust, Trond" Cc: Hellwig Christoph , "Matt W. Benjamin" , Dr Fields James Bruce , Christoph Anton Mitterer , Mailing List Linux NFS , Wheeler Ric In-Reply-To: <95C57010-2A89-423C-8668-DF963ABF8BB6@netapp.com> References: <312486415.16.1382796101374.JavaMail.root@thunderbeast.private.linuxbox.com> <5FC093E3-1CD3-4AC7-A91F-37C8DEC6BEFE@netapp.com> <20131027165628.GA447@infradead.org> <95C57010-2A89-423C-8668-DF963ABF8BB6@netapp.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 14:30:55 -0400 Message-ID: <1382898655.899.122.camel@willson.li.ssimo.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, 2013-10-27 at 18:07 +0000, Myklebust, Trond wrote: > On Oct 27, 2013, at 12:56 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 12:31:46PM +0000, Myklebust, Trond wrote: > >> The NFSv4 working group has no authority to do so. POSIX would be the right address. > > > > The complete lack of clue, authority or even defined semantics didn't > > stop them from defining their ACL model. User extended attributes are > > harmless compared to that, even if everyone has subtly different > > flavours. > > > > The user xattrs are in principle harmless. What about "trusted.*"? > > BTW: caching any xattrs is a problem. There is no close-to-open model that you can use and neither is there locking. This is already causing a problem for labeled nfs... You could start without caching them. Simo. -- Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York