On Sat, Sep 05 2026, Amir Goldstein wrote: > On Fri, Sep 4, 2026 at 12:38 PM Luis Henriques <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> This adds some extra tests to ACL caching: >> - Verify that reading ACLs results in the expected number of requests >> being sent user-space, depending on whether cache is enabled or disabled >> - Verify caching behaviour on some caching invalidation scenarios >> >> While there, add test binary to .gitignore. >> >> Signed-off-by: Luis Henriques <[email protected]> >> --- >> .../selftests/filesystems/fuse/.gitignore | 1 + >> .../filesystems/fuse/fuse_acl_cache_test.c | 179 ++++++++++++++++++ >> 2 files changed, 180 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/filesystems/fuse/.gitignore >> b/tools/testing/selftests/filesystems/fuse/.gitignore >> index fb51603fe419..f7f3dd345a50 100644 >> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/filesystems/fuse/.gitignore >> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/filesystems/fuse/.gitignore >> @@ -2,3 +2,4 @@ >> fuse_mnt >> fusectl_test >> write_extend_eof_test >> +fuse_acl_cache_test >> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/filesystems/fuse/fuse_acl_cache_test.c >> b/tools/testing/selftests/filesystems/fuse/fuse_acl_cache_test.c >> index c2d6658ff7de..9608a0adb967 100644 >> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/filesystems/fuse/fuse_acl_cache_test.c >> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/filesystems/fuse/fuse_acl_cache_test.c >> @@ -83,6 +83,7 @@ struct daemon_state { >> uint8_t *acl; >> size_t acl_size; >> int getxattr_count; >> + bool cache; >> }; >> >> /* >> @@ -91,9 +92,17 @@ struct daemon_state { >> */ >> static struct daemon_state g_ds = { >> .lock = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER, >> + .cache = false, >> }; >> >> /* ---- FUSE lowlevel callbacks >> -------------------------------------------- */ >> +static void fs_init(void *userdata, struct fuse_conn_info *conn) >> +{ >> + pthread_mutex_lock(&g_ds.lock); >> + if (g_ds.cache) >> + fuse_set_feature_flag(conn, FUSE_CAP_POSIX_ACL); >> + pthread_mutex_unlock(&g_ds.lock); >> +} >> >> static void fs_lookup(fuse_req_t req, fuse_ino_t parent, const char *name) >> { >> @@ -115,6 +124,8 @@ static void fs_lookup(fuse_req_t req, fuse_ino_t parent, >> const char *name) >> e.attr.st_ino = FILE_INO; >> e.attr.st_mode = S_IFREG | 0644; >> e.attr.st_nlink = 1; >> + e.attr.st_uid = getuid(); >> + e.attr.st_gid = getgid(); >> fuse_reply_entry(req, &e); >> } >> >> @@ -175,10 +186,38 @@ static void fs_getxattr(fuse_req_t req, fuse_ino_t >> ino, const char *name, >> free(acl); >> } >> >> +static void fs_setxattr(fuse_req_t req, fuse_ino_t ino, const char *name, >> + const char *value, size_t size, int flags) >> +{ >> + int ret = 0; >> + uint8_t *acl; >> + >> + if (ino != FILE_INO) >> + ret = ENOENT; >> + else if (!strcmp(name, "system.posix_acl_access")) { >> + acl = malloc(size); >> + if (acl) { >> + memcpy(acl, value, size); >> + pthread_mutex_lock(&g_ds.lock); >> + if (g_ds.acl) >> + free(g_ds.acl); >> + g_ds.acl = acl; >> + g_ds.acl_size = size; >> + pthread_mutex_unlock(&g_ds.lock); >> + } else >> + ret = ENOMEM; >> + } else >> + ret = ENOTSUP; >> + > > I am allergic to mismatching {} in if/else statements.
Ah! Ah! OK, I'll fix that. (And I also admit I'm not consistent with this, which probably means I'm not allergic :-) ) > I personally think that code will be cleaner with a goto error > without all these multi nesting levels. Sure, I'll refactor it accordingly. Cheers, -- Luís
