[PATCH v4] vfs_glusterfs: Implement proper mashalling/unmarshalling of ACLs

[Jeremy Allison]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 04:48:45PM -0700, Anand Avati wrote:
> On 08/11/2013 10:23 PM, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> >On Sun, 2013-08-11 at 15:59 -0400, Anand Avati wrote:
> >>Use the primitives available in Samba byteorder.h for implementing
> >>proper (un)marshalling of ACL xattrs.
> >
> >I'll preface this by saying I know how painful it is when every man and
> >his dog has a different view on how something should be implemented, but
> >anyway:
> >
> >I think this would be better done in IDL.  In general, Samba has moved
> >from hand-marshalling to IDL for everything that isn't totally silly to
> >do that way (and even then, we fit those into IDL most of the time).
> >
> >Could you try adding this to smb_acl.idl instead, and then using the
> >generated the pull/push functions?
> >
> >This is much less error prone than hand-marshaling, and comes with free
> >pretty-printers and the ability to trivially manipulate the objects in
> >python, if you ever need that.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> >Andrew Bartlett
> >
> 
> Andrew,
>  Thanks for your comments. I am new to the IDL syntax used in Samba,
> and still trying to understand how it works. While that is
> definitely a better approach and for long term maintainability, this
> patch is fixing a bug. Can we view them as two separate tasks? I
> will post the IDL conversion patch as soon as I wrap my head around
> how that works. In the mean time fixing this bug will be good
> progress, independently. Please let me know if you agree with the
> approach, and if so, any comments on the patch itself?

Anand,

	Whilst Andrew is right (we shouldn't be adding more
hand-marshalled code into Samba) I appreciate the immediacy
of the bug fix, and yes we should treat them as two different
things :-).

At first glance the code looks like it does exactly what
I'd hoped for - thanks very much !

I should be able to do a more formal review tomorrow.

Cheers,

	Jeremy.