On 06/22/2018 06:48 PM, David Sterba wrote:
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 10:58:16AM +0800, Chengguang Xu wrote:
Currently, when encoutering -ERANGE in btrfs_get_acl(),
just set acl to NULL so that we cannot get proper
acl information but the operation looks successful.
Do you have a reproducer for that?
ERANGE is returned from btrfs_getxattr in case the buffer is not large
enough to store the restult, but the first call to btrfs_getxattr will
read the size and then a temporary buffer of that size is allocated.
So ERANGE should not be able to make it to the the condition at all.
Yes, I think you are right.
It might only happen in distributed filesystems(like cephfs) by concurrent
set/get from different clients, so in this case, checking -ERANGE condition
is reasonable(can add retry or some other error handlings) but the check
seems meaningless for local filesystems.
I have tested on some local filesystems before posting patch and found
there is no chance to make it to the -ERANGE condition. Even if we can
get into that condition set acl to NULL looks not correct.
In any case, I think we should remove the check 'size == -ERANGE' in
btrfs_gat_acl(),
maybe I should change commit log to avoid misunderstanding.
Thanks,
Chengguang.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
