From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/18] Consolidate Posix ACL implementation Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 11:46:37 -0800 Message-ID: <20131206194637.GA32122@infradead.org> References: <20131201115903.910559036@bombadil.infradead.org> <279325185.39210.1386266234086.JavaMail.zimbra@linbit.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Christoph Hellwig , viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Mark Fasheh , Joel Becker , reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com, jfs-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net, cluster-devel@redhat.com, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org To: Andreas Gruenbacher Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <279325185.39210.1386266234086.JavaMail.zimbra@linbit.com> Sender: reiserfs-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 06:57:14PM +0100, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: > I see that get_acl and set_acl are being defined in some but not all symlink inode operations (for example, btrfs them while ext4 does not), and that posix_acl_xattr_set() doesn't check if set_acl is defined. Symlinks cannot have ACLs, so set_acl should either never be defined for symlinks (and a NULL check is then needed in posix_acl_xattr_set()), or it is defined in all inode operations, and S_ISNLNK() check is needed in posix_acl_xattr_set(). That latter check should probably be added in any case to be on the safe side. Yes, we should add the check. We also in general should not have set_acl/get_acl on links and I'll look over it. > Patch 6 also declares posix_acl_prepare() but this function is never introduced; this must be a leftover from a previous version. Indeed. Thanks for the review!