lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Oct]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH -V7 25/26] ext4: Implement rich acl for ext4
Date
On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 12:41:15 -0600, Andreas Dilger <adilger@dilger.ca> wrote:
> On 2011-10-18, at 9:33 AM, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> > From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >
> > Support the richacl permission model in ext4. The richacls are stored
> > in "system.richacl" xattrs.This need to be enabled by tune2fs or during
> > mkfs.ext4
>
> It isn't clear from your commit comment or the code what needs to be enabled by tune2fs or mkfs.ext4. Please list the specific ext4 feature
> that needs to be enabled.


The last patch explains the feature flag details
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1204873

I am adding a new compat feature flag to indicate richacl is
enabled.

>
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_EXT4_FS_RICHACL
> > +#define EXT4_IS_RICHACL(inode) IS_RICHACL(inode)
> >
>
> > +#else /* CONFIG_FS_EXT4_RICHACL */
> > +
> > +#define EXT4_IS_RICHACL(inode) (0)
>
> It is a bit confusing that you are using both EXT4_IS_RICHACL() and
> IS_RICHACL() in this code. Initially I thought EXT4_IS_RICHACL() was
> checking an ext4-specific inode flag, but it seems that it is instead
> conditional upon the configure flags.
>

The reason is to not do the superblock flag check when EXT4_FS_RICHACL is not
enabled.


> It looks like it should be possible to use EXT4_IS_RICHACL() in all
> of the code, since the richacl-specific code will not be compiled
> anyway.
>

The reasoning is, all richacl specific code do check for whether
MS_RICHACL is enabled or not and the common file system code does
something similar to EXT4_IS_RICHACL() that is (0) when the file
system is not compiled with richacl option.

-aneesh


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-10-19 07:47    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site