On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 10:46:32PM +0400, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> Christoph, can you comment on what Steve said to my patch which is exactly
> the same as yours acl-endianess-annotations.patch?
Sure.
> ============================================================================
> From: Steven French <[email protected]>
>
> You may be correct, but making the in memory representations of these
> structions little endian seems wrong and I would be surprised if it were
> little endian, but I have not had time to think through what happens when a
> local filesystem takes an existing hard drive with ACLs on various inodes
> and moves the drive from a little endian to a big endian machine and the
> endian implications on this structure.
>
> Although the representation on the wire for the cifs protocol is clearly
> little endian for the acl entries, I am uncomfortable with changes to the
> in memory representation until I do more checking.
I have asked myself that question aswell. The odd thing about our posix
ACL implementation is that the ACL data passed to the xattr syscalls is
_always_ little endian, which is what the structure in this file define.
The incore represenation is in posix_acl.h and is always little endian.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
