From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4FEBC43603 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:18:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91C9C21775 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 04:18:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=szeredi.hu header.i=@szeredi.hu header.b="DvTbOKYI" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727324AbfLQES2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Dec 2019 23:18:28 -0500 Received: from mail-io1-f67.google.com ([209.85.166.67]:35567 "EHLO mail-io1-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727125AbfLQES1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Dec 2019 23:18:27 -0500 Received: by mail-io1-f67.google.com with SMTP id v18so8511729iol.2 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 20:18:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=szeredi.hu; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Jb9M+rbRjnA9WExGlqoiB6hucEgbZvrJ0pX83Vp94eg=; b=DvTbOKYI8phw0PI0t2+8p4vSY+wjq7KSoWrGlyfFeM5oI+1Bg4N3oZAMUsoQJNl0gI sgc8wFV1ynwzqBQ/PTWd2kU+xELxWE4mYEldSPvMWVEXpkiINQMxcDTNPRDpZCtBwVue Q1YdrI14QoDWEnRAekWwpKGIMKe/7VcGzsTrg= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Jb9M+rbRjnA9WExGlqoiB6hucEgbZvrJ0pX83Vp94eg=; b=X+iMQhnyySf5uuBE9sEwWi+suXD41YBv48tuajFo9fIzzYKX7RAsjs4nriy70RhY98 QxFvyHPMfybsp9Kij2yk6onmu0rwGq+SBEGFmjlPe/isMoV+/+qmcZQRNtUq2IXDiROw Ag/TY17JamOHzuFkcBKeApNapezzvYgHDsvbseRgRLGnKH8z01CId3ygNXKHp1dUakeB OWhlnKrxca2c1YhYke+PFAahrziL526OPyzLy2SM3X5sgC6wUFP0Ls3uEe8F5Ji4IJ/I 4ctccW/GicC+jFYCbdqynhY74tcK06zFb1TSUgifqAkH/PLgZLmkadyEPVdPUOQdTvCq OngA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUNZgJSy5jwD/5A+Ro6EQEPpBJSYGr+MqRqNULpqj4M4q6AuAT4 XPttNX8+RA5/MJSHKCCnkABU9rdp4Dcg2vERRtR19g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyivWqHpq34LL112ySk4nWx9NJjR+yoiXLQHbvhymFpkotIDQ4B0u6OLe3cOqHTQkNVLLbEOP+wCw9CM3cOrK4= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:f404:: with SMTP id i4mr2181275iog.252.1576556307220; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 20:18:27 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20191128155940.17530-1-mszeredi@redhat.com> <20191128155940.17530-12-mszeredi@redhat.com> <20191217034252.GT4203@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20191217034252.GT4203@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> From: Miklos Szeredi Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 05:18:16 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/12] vfs: don't parse "posixacl" option To: Al Viro Cc: Miklos Szeredi , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 4:42 AM Al Viro wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 04:59:39PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > Unlike the others, this is _not_ a standard option accepted by mount(8). > > > > In fact SB_POSIXACL is an internal flag, and accepting MS_POSIXACL on the > > mount(2) interface is possibly a bug. > > > > The only filesystem that apparently wants to handle the "posixacl" option > > is 9p, but it has special handling of that option besides setting > > SB_POSIXACL. > > Huh? For e.g. ceph having -o posixacl and -o acl are currently equivalent; > your patch would seem to break that, wouldn't it? Yet again, this has nothing to do with mount(2) behavior. Also note that mount(8) does *not* handle "posixacl" and does *not* ever set MS_POSIXACL. So this has exactly zero chance of breaking anything. Thanks, Miklos