Return-Path: Received: from mail-la0-f48.google.com ([209.85.215.48]:34363 "EHLO mail-la0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751256AbbJEWBV (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Oct 2015 18:01:21 -0400 Received: by labzv5 with SMTP id zv5so133636809lab.1 for ; Mon, 05 Oct 2015 15:01:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20151005211711.GB23350@dastard> References: <1443391772-10171-1-git-send-email-agruenba@redhat.com> <20151004062313.GA20212@infradead.org> <20151005211711.GB23350@dastard> Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 00:01:19 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 00/41] Richacls From: Andreas Gruenbacher To: Dave Chinner Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Alexander Viro , "Theodore Ts'o" , Andreas Dilger , "J. Bruce Fields" , Jeff Layton , Trond Myklebust , Anna Schumaker , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, LKML , linux-fsdevel , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 11:17 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 08:45:40PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: >> On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> > After that the wire up should be so trivial that you can wire up btrfs, >> > xfs and f2fs as well, which is important to make the feature mergeable. >> >> Why would the patch queue become more mergeable by having support for >> more filesystems in it? The filesystem specific code really isn't all >> that interesting. > > The hardest part for the filesystem support is the on-disk feature > flag that needs to be set. The kernel part of that is easy, but it's > an on-disk format change and so there's also all the userspace side > for mkfs, fsck, debug tools, etc, that also need to be able to parse > and understand it. So while the xattr code can be made much more > generic, there's a bunch of filesystem specific code that needs to > go into multiple different repositories and userspace packages for > this. Yes. > Andreas, I also can't remember if any xfstests have been written for > these ACLs? That would certainly help make sure all these > filesystems have equivalent behaviour... There's a reasonable amount of tests in the richacl user-space package which are shell based, with a few small C helpers. We could move those into xfstests eventually; now seems a bit early to me. Thanks, Andreas