IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [nfsv4] one umask-02 question

Mike Kupfer <mike.kupfer@oracle.com> Fri, 02 December 2016 20:18 UTC

Return-Path: <mike.kupfer@oracle.com>
X-Original-To: nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12801127077 for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Dec 2016 12:18:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.896, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kG7Cvelb9MwW for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Dec 2016 12:18:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com (aserp1040.oracle.com [141.146.126.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 321D612007C for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Dec 2016 12:18:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aserv0022.oracle.com (aserv0022.oracle.com [141.146.126.234]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id uB2KIWZY002412 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK) for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Dec 2016 20:18:32 GMT
Received: from athyra-vm1.us.oracle.com (athyra-vm1.us.oracle.com [10.132.144.25]) by aserv0022.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id uB2KIVeA004091 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Dec 2016 20:18:32 GMT
Received: from athyra-vm1.us.oracle.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by athyra-vm1.us.oracle.com (8.15.2+Sun/8.15.2) with ESMTP id uB2JxkD8005608; Fri, 2 Dec 2016 11:59:46 -0800 (PST)
From: Mike Kupfer <mike.kupfer@oracle.com>
To: Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@redhat.com>
In-reply-to: <CAHc6FU6OkNWi1HP79auC10pqF03DJcm2kExNLhg9z-ofDRjmYA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3471.1480623047@athyra-vm1.us.oracle.com> <CADaq8jeHsqRi8PEJPVs0uma_9TjGrFVj=-yq-4NF-9awX6wP0g@mail.gmail.com> <20161201220137.GA1589@fieldses.org> <CAHc6FU6OkNWi1HP79auC10pqF03DJcm2kExNLhg9z-ofDRjmYA@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@redhat.com> message dated "Fri, 02 Dec 2016 01:57:43 +0100."
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+mdk01; nmh 1.2; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2016 11:59:46 -0800
Message-ID: <5607.1480708786@athyra-vm1.us.oracle.com>
X-Source-IP: aserv0022.oracle.com [141.146.126.234]
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nfsv4/uX0sW1ltFZY7ME6lKc-7qzW6Xn4>
Cc: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>, "nfsv4@ietf.org" <nfsv4@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] one umask-02 question
X-BeenThere: nfsv4@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: NFSv4 Working Group <nfsv4.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/nfsv4>, <mailto:nfsv4-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/nfsv4/>
List-Post: <mailto:nfsv4@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:nfsv4-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4>, <mailto:nfsv4-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2016 20:18:35 -0000

Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:

> returning INVAL will always require
> additional code that doesn't actually add any benefits.

The benefit comes in when trying to troubleshoot unexpected behavior.

Particularly since we already have the precedent of "mode" and
"mode_set_masked", I recommend returning INVAL.

> If it makes
> anyone feel better, we might just as well require INVAL to be
> returned, though.

Thanks.

mike

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email