On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 9:22 AM, Jeff Layton <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Mar 2011 09:17:48 -0600
> Shirish Pargaonkar <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 8:32 AM, Jeff Layton <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > On Mon,  7 Mar 2011 23:00:25 -0600
>> > [email protected] wrote:
>> >
>> >> From: Shirish Pargaonkar <[email protected]>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Allow setting cifs_acl on the server.
>> >> Pass on to the server the ACL blob generated by an application.
>> >> cifs is just a pass-through, server decides whether to enforce/apply
>> >> the ACL blob composed by an application.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Shirish Pargaonkar <[email protected]>
>> >
>> > Seems sane enough and is probably more useful than trying to map all of
>> > this to POSIX acl's and modes. I wonder though...if you do this, then
>> > the permissions and possibly ownership change. Do you need to
>>
>> owner/group will not change, only the ACL (DACL).
>>
>
> So I can't change group ownership on the file by modifying the DACL?
>

ACL is a list of ACEs and owner and group do not qualify as an ACE.

> Also, while I don't particularly like the cifsacl acl-to-mode mapping
> code, it still exists. If someone changes the ACL, don't you need to
> account for the possibility that the mode has also changed?

yes. Should invalidate the inode metadata as you stated earlier.

>
> --
> Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to