posix_acl_xattr_set() already does the check, and it's the only
way to feed in an ACL from userspace.
So the check here is useless, remove it.
Signed-off-by: zhang zhen <zhenzhang.zhang@huawei.com>
Reviewed-by: Yan, Zheng <zheng.z.yan@intel.com>
If acl is equivalent to file mode permission bits, ceph_set_acl()
needs to remove any existing acl xattr. Use __ceph_setxattr() to
handle both setting and removing acl xattr cases, it doesn't return
-ENODATA when there is no acl xattr.
Signed-off-by: Yan, Zheng <zheng.z.yan@intel.com>
- ->get_acl only gets called after we checked for a cached ACL, so no
need to call get_cached_acl again.
- no need to check IS_POSIXACL in ->get_acl, without that it should
never get set as all the callers that set it already have the check.
- you should be able to use the full posix_acl_create in CEPH
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Sage Weil <sage@inktank.com>
The merge of commit 7221fe4c2e ("ceph: add acl for cephfs") raced with
upstream changes in the generic POSIX ACL code (eg commit 2aeccbe957
"fs: add generic xattr_acl handlers" and others).
Some of the fallout was fixed in commit 4db658ea0c ("ceph: Fix up after
semantic merge conflict"), but it was incomplete: the set_acl
inode_operation wasn't getting set, and the prototype needed to be
adjusted a bit (it doesn't take a dentry anymore).
Signed-off-by: Sage Weil <sage@inktank.com>
Signed-off-by: Ilya Dryomov <ilya.dryomov@inktank.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
The previous ceph-client merge resulted in ceph not even building,
because there was a merge conflict that wasn't visible as an actual data
conflict: commit 7221fe4c2e ("ceph: add acl for cephfs") added support
for POSIX ACL's into Ceph, but unluckily we also had the VFS tree change
a lot of the POSIX ACL helper functions to be much more helpful to
filesystems (see for example commits 2aeccbe957 "fs: add generic
xattr_acl handlers", 5bf3258fd2 "fs: make posix_acl_chmod more useful"
and 37bc15392a "fs: make posix_acl_create more useful")
The reason this conflict wasn't obvious was many-fold: because it was a
semantic conflict rather than a data conflict, it wasn't visible in the
git merge as a conflict. And because the VFS tree hadn't been in
linux-next, people hadn't become aware of it that way. And because I
was at jury duty this morning, I was using my laptop and as a result not
doing constant "allmodconfig" builds.
Anyway, this fixes the build and generally removes a fair chunk of the
Ceph POSIX ACL support code, since the improved helpers seem to match
really well for Ceph too. But I don't actually have any way to *test*
the end result, and I was really hoping for some ACK's for this. Oh,
well.
Not compiling certainly doesn't make things easier to test, so I'm
committing this without the acks after having waited for four hours...
Plus it's what I would have done for the merge had I noticed the
semantic conflict..
Reported-by: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
Cc: Sage Weil <sage@inktank.com>
Cc: Guangliang Zhao <lucienchao@gmail.com>
Cc: Li Wang <li.wang@ubuntykylin.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
