nfs/super: check NFS_CAP_ACLS instead of the NFS version
Subsystems (3)
PATCH 1/1 nfs/super: check NFS_CAP_ACLS instead of the NFS version
This sets SB_POSIXACL only if ACL support is really enabled, instead of always setting SB_POSIXACL if the NFS protocol version theoretically supports ACL.
The code comment says "We will [apply the umask] ourselves", but that happens in posix_acl_create() only if the kernel has POSIX ACL support. Without it, posix_acl_create() is an empty dummy function.
So let's not pretend we will apply the umask if we can already know that we will never.
This fixes a problem where the umask is always ignored in the NFS client when compiled without CONFIG_FS_POSIX_ACL. This is a 4 year old regression caused by commit 013cdf1088d723 which itself was not completely wrong, but failed to consider all the side effects by misdesigned VFS code.
--- fs/nfs/super.c | 9 +++++++-- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
fs/nfs/super.c +7 -2
@@ -1064,14 +1064,19 @@ static void nfs_fill_super(struct super_block *sb, struct nfs_fs_context *ctx)* The VFS shouldn't apply the umask to mode bits. * We will do so ourselves when necessary. */ - sb->s_flags |=SB_POSIXACL ; +if (NFS_SB (sb)->caps &NFS_CAP_ACLS ) { + sb->s_flags |=SB_POSIXACL ; + } + sb->s_time_gran =1 ; sb->s_time_min =0 ; sb->s_time_max =U32_MAX ; sb->s_export_op = &nfs_export_ops;break ;case 4 : - sb->s_flags |=SB_POSIXACL ; +if (NFS_SB (sb)->caps &NFS_CAP_ACLS ) { + sb->s_flags |=SB_POSIXACL ; + } sb->s_time_gran =1 ; sb->s_time_min =S64_MIN ; sb->s_time_max =S64_MAX ;
Signature · 1 line
2.39.2
Quoted 8 lines · Max Kellermann
This sets
SB_POSIXACLonly if ACL support is really enabled, instead of always settingSB_POSIXACLif the NFS protocol version theoretically supports ACL.The code comment says "We will [apply the umask] ourselves", but that happens in
posix_acl_create()only if the kernel has POSIX ACL support. Without it,posix_acl_create()is an empty dummy function.
Quoted 9 lines
So let's not pretend we will apply the umask if we can already know that we will never.
This fixes a problem where the umask is always ignored in the NFS client when compiled without
CONFIG_FS_POSIX_ACL. This is a 4 year old regression caused by commit013cdf1088d723which itself was not completely wrong, but failed to consider all the side effects by misdesigned VFS code.
A little more than 4 years now!
Quoted 12 lines
Reviewed-by J. Bruce Fields <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Max Kellermann <[email protected]>--- fs/nfs/super.c | 9 +++++++-- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)fs/nfs/super.c +0
-0
fs/nfs/super.c static void nfs_fill_super(struct super_block *sb, struct nfs_fs_context *ctx) · line 1070
Quoted 8 lines
fs/nfs/super.c +4
-1@@ -1064,14 +1064,19 @@ static void nfs_fill_super(struct super_block *sb, struct nfs_fs_context *ctx)* The VFS shouldn't apply the umask to mode bits. * We will do so ourselves when necessary. */ - sb->s_flags |=SB_POSIXACL ; +if (NFS_SB (sb)->caps &NFS_CAP_ACLS ) { + sb->s_flags |=SB_POSIXACL ; + } +
nit: curly braces aren't needed here
fs/nfs/super.c static void nfs_fill_super(struct super_block *sb, struct nfs_fs_context *ctx) · line 1082
Quoted 13 lines
fs/nfs/super.c +3
-1sb->s_time_gran =1 ; sb->s_time_min =0 ; sb->s_time_max =U32_MAX ; sb->s_export_op = &nfs_export_ops;break ;case 4 : - sb->s_flags |=SB_POSIXACL ; +if (NFS_SB (sb)->caps &NFS_CAP_ACLS ) { + sb->s_flags |=SB_POSIXACL ; + } sb->s_time_gran =1 ; sb->s_time_min =S64_MIN ; sb->s_time_max =S64_MAX ;
(cc'ing Christian)
This patch may have a minor conflict with this patch:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nfs/[email protected]/
...but it seems like the right thing to do if POSIX ACLs are compiled out.