https://jira.whamcloud.com This file is an XML representation of an issue en-us 9.4.14 940014 05-12-2023 https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-5607 Lustre <p>I like to see Intel remove a older and dead code, but it need to do more carefully.</p> <div class="preformatted panel" style="border-width: 1px;"><div class="preformattedContent panelContent"> <pre>commit 281671b5ee43c2aea5d5b708aadf10fd1df45b16 Author: John L. Hammond &lt;john.hammond@intel.com&gt; Date: Thu May 1 16:26:41 2014 -0500 LU-4961 lustre: remove liblustre.h and obd.h from userspace </pre> </div></div> <p>removes a wire checks for a xattr entries.</p> <div class="code panel" style="border-width: 1px;"><div class="codeContent panelContent"> <pre class="code-java">-#ifdef LIBLUSTRE_POSIX_ACL - - <span class="code-comment">/* Checks <span class="code-keyword">for</span> type posix_acl_xattr_entry */</span> - LASSERTF((<span class="code-object">int</span>)sizeof(posix_acl_xattr_entry) == 8, <span class="code-quote">"found %lld\n"</span>, - (<span class="code-object">long</span> <span class="code-object">long</span>)(<span class="code-object">int</span>)sizeof(posix_acl_xattr_entry)); - LASSERTF((<span class="code-object">int</span>)offsetof(posix_acl_xattr_entry, e_tag) == 0, <span class="code-quote">"found %lld\n"</span>, </pre> </div></div> <p>so any changes in posix_acl_xattr_entry (used in wire protocol) will don't found during lustre compile.</p> LU-5607

xattr interoperability checks removed.

Bug Blocker Closed Fixed John Hammond Alexey Lyashkov Thu, 11 Sep 2014 07:55:33 +0000 Wed, 24 Sep 2014 13:20:43 +0000 Wed, 24 Sep 2014 13:19:54 +0000 Lustre 2.7.0 0 4 <p>It is a bad idea that Lustre depends directly on struct posix_acl_xattr_entry (a kernel data structure) for the wire protocol. It would be better to define our own copy of struct lustre_acl_xattr_entry in lustre_idl.h and "convert" to/from this structure for the network RPCs. We could LASSERT() that they are the same size in the packing routines to ensure we catch any potential changes to the structure.</p> <p>There is not a very big risk of this structure changing in the kernel, since it is also stored directly to disk for ext2/3/4, but there may be risk of change if/when the NFSv4-style ACLs are introduced at some point.</p> <p>I have none objections over defining a own XATTR, ACL structures but it's will be more bigger patch when return a wire checks. From my point view - restore a wire checks very easy and low risk, so we may continue work with it, but introduce a new structures later.</p> <p>own xattr entry already exist for remote ACL code (did it need now? i think it's don't used after landing long time ago) so we have an base for new work.</p> <p>Please see <a href="http://review.whamcloud.com/11933" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">http://review.whamcloud.com/11933</a>.</p> <p>Patch landed to master.</p> Development Rank 1|hzwvzr: Rank (Obsolete) 15686 Severity