[PATCH] Storing the ACL control flags with vfs gpfs.

Alexander Werth werth at linux.vnet.ibm.com
Fri Mar 14 04:40:20 MDT 2014

On Thu, 2014-03-13 at 12:28 -0700, Christof Schmitt wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 02:24:48PM +0100, Alexander Werth wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > The current nfs4 module drops the ACL control flags from the security
> > descriptor. The NFS4.1 spec also specifies ACL flags so I added a way to
> > pass these control flags on to the nfs4 filesystems.
> > 
> > The first patch adds hocks to the nfs4_acls common code to store and
> > retrieve the control flags in the acl struct.
> > 
> > 
> > And I wrote a patch that allows to store these ACL control flags in the
> > vfs gpfs module which is supported with gpfs 3.5 and up.
> > The vfs gpfs patch allows to build without the control flags on older
> > gpfs versions and also has the ability to run the same vfs module on
> > older and newer gpfs versions.
> > 
> > Both patches apply to the current master.
> > Please comment.
> In the past, we have avoided ifdefs in the vfs_gpfs module. I am
> wondering if it would be possible to access the flags field through a
> pointer and avoid the gpfs 3.5 specific parts in the code. Once we no
> longer care about older gpfs versions, we can cleanup the code and use
> the proper struct members.
> None of the solutions (ifdef or pointer) is perfect, but i would be
> leaning towards always getting the same module from a compile, and avoid
> the ifdefs.

I've redone the patch using literals and comments and some pointer
arithmetic to avoid the dependency on the gpfs 3.5 header file.
The literals can be replaced with the defines from the 3.5 header file
once gpfs 3.4 is out of service.

> A smaller comment would be avoid the goto again loop, and simply
> issuing the call again. I think the intent is to just retry once with
> different parameters, so we don't need the loop.


> And a very minor thing is to use the C99 style integers (e.g. uint_16)
> instead of e.g. uin16:
> README.Coding
> ..., new code should adhere to the following conventions:
> ...
>   * Exact width integers are of type [u]int[8|16|32|64]_t

Ok, thanks.

Here's the second iteration for the patch. 
Btw. the control flags contain the dacl protected flag which is
important to support the "Include inheritable permissions from this
object's parent" checkbox.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0001-vfs-Support-NFS-control-flags-in-nfs4_acls.c.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 2772 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba-technical/attachments/20140314/01d4b87b/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0002-vfs-Store-ACL-control-flags-in-gpfs-vfs-module.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 8334 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba-technical/attachments/20140314/01d4b87b/attachment-0001.bin>

More information about the samba-technical mailing list