Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 26 Jun 2005 13:34:26 +0100 | From | Christoph Hellwig <> | Subject | Re: Fwd: Re: [patch 1/3] __leify posix_acl_xattr_entry, posix_acl_xattr_header |
| |
On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 10:46:32PM +0400, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > Christoph, can you comment on what Steve said to my patch which is exactly > the same as yours acl-endianess-annotations.patch?
Sure.
> ============================================================================ > From: Steven French <sfrench@us.ibm.com> > > You may be correct, but making the in memory representations of these > structions little endian seems wrong and I would be surprised if it were > little endian, but I have not had time to think through what happens when a > local filesystem takes an existing hard drive with ACLs on various inodes > and moves the drive from a little endian to a big endian machine and the > endian implications on this structure. > > Although the representation on the wire for the cifs protocol is clearly > little endian for the acl entries, I am uncomfortable with changes to the > in memory representation until I do more checking.
I have asked myself that question aswell. The odd thing about our posix ACL implementation is that the ACL data passed to the xattr syscalls is _always_ little endian, which is what the structure in this file define.
The incore represenation is in posix_acl.h and is always little endian. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |