Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1355940 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH v18 19/22] richacl: Add richacl xattr handler

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH v18 19/22] richacl: Add richacl xattr handler Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> - 2016-03-11 15:20 +0100
    Re: [PATCH v18 19/22] richacl: Add richacl xattr handler "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org> - 2016-03-11 15:20 +0100
      Re: [PATCH v18 19/22] richacl: Add richacl xattr handler Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> - 2016-03-15 08:20 +0100
        Re: [PATCH v18 19/22] richacl: Add richacl xattr handler "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org> - 2016-03-15 22:10 +0100

#1355940 — Re: [PATCH v18 19/22] richacl: Add richacl xattr handler

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 09:17:24AM +0100, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> Add richacl xattr handler implementing the xattr operations based on the
> get_richacl and set_richacl inode operations.

Given all the issues with Posix ACLs and selinux attributes these really
should be proper syscalls instead of abusing the xattr interface.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1355942

On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 06:17:35AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 09:17:24AM +0100, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> > Add richacl xattr handler implementing the xattr operations based on the
> > get_richacl and set_richacl inode operations.
> 
> Given all the issues with Posix ACLs and selinux attributes these really
> should be proper syscalls instead of abusing the xattr interface.

What are those problems exactly?

--b.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1357847

On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 09:19:05AM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 06:17:35AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 09:17:24AM +0100, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> > > Add richacl xattr handler implementing the xattr operations based on the
> > > get_richacl and set_richacl inode operations.
> > 
> > Given all the issues with Posix ACLs and selinux attributes these really
> > should be proper syscalls instead of abusing the xattr interface.
> 
> What are those problems exactly?

That people get confused between the attr used by the xattr syscall
interface and the attr used to store things on disk or the protocol.
This has happened every time we have non-native support, e.g. XFS, NFS,
CIFS, ntfs, etc.  And it's only going to become worse.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1358245

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 12:10:14AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 09:19:05AM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 06:17:35AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 09:17:24AM +0100, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> > > > Add richacl xattr handler implementing the xattr operations based on the
> > > > get_richacl and set_richacl inode operations.
> > > 
> > > Given all the issues with Posix ACLs and selinux attributes these really
> > > should be proper syscalls instead of abusing the xattr interface.
> > 
> > What are those problems exactly?
> 
> That people get confused between the attr used by the xattr syscall
> interface and the attr used to store things on disk or the protocol.
> This has happened every time we have non-native support, e.g. XFS, NFS,
> CIFS, ntfs, etc.  And it's only going to become worse.

How has that confusion caused problems in practice?

--b.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web