Re: [PATCH] fuse: cache POSIX ACLs when setting them
Amir Goldstein <[email protected]> Fri, 17 Jul 2026 16:43:15 +0200
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.fuse-devel,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAOQ4uxjxGeGW=ndKTQ7gWr4N2DJLMxtK4qdhXDFQPrVMMQgDZw@mail.gmail.com> |
On Fri, Jul 17, 2026 at 3:57=E2=80=AFPM Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]> = wrote: > > On Thu, 2 Jul 2026 at 10:56, Luis Henriques <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Yeah, maybe your right, maybe I'm missing something as well and there i= s a > > good reason for not doing it. > > > > I was going to CC Christian, but I see you did that already :-) > > > > Maybe he remembers the reasons behind this while working on commit > > facd61053cff ("fuse: fixes after adapting to new posix acl api"). > > It's not that. Those lines come from the original fuse acl support in > commit 60bcc88ad185 ("fuse: Add posix ACL support"). Right. > > Maybe the thinking behind that was that the server might modify the > acl when setting it. Not sure if this can actually happen for network > fs. Same conclusion that Luis and me reached - it is technically possible that a server like that exists, but they probably don't. > > In any case it is unlikely to matter in real world cases. For now > let's just document these quirks. unlikely to matter if we do cache on setacl or unlikely to matter if we don't cache? I guess both are true. Thanks, Amir.