Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from e23smtp03.au.ibm.com ([202.81.31.145]:55222 "EHLO e23smtp03.au.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751252AbaD1Fy1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Apr 2014 01:54:27 -0400 Received: from /spool/local by e23smtp03.au.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 15:54:26 +1000 From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: agruen@kernel.org, bfields@fieldses.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 -V1 00/22] New ACL format for better NFSv4 acl interoperability In-Reply-To: <20140428043909.GA26778@infradead.org> References: <1398615293-22931-1-git-send-email-aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20140428043909.GA26778@infradead.org> Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 11:24:08 +0530 Message-ID: <87wqeaatj3.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Christoph Hellwig writes: > This doesn't address any or the previous points: > > - common implementation instead of the godawful boilerplate code > (and we even fixed most of this for Posix ACL by now, so even less > reason to do the same crap again!) We already do that with richacl. Richacl already have most of the details implemented in common code. Comparing to recent posix acl changes we could still simplify chmod and xattr bits. I will do that in the next update. > - common data structure with Posix ACLs > Can you explain this ?. Why do we want to do that ? > And of course no real explanation why we need the braindead access/deny > scheme at how it will get properly integrated with the system. > > So in this for a clear NAK. -aneesh