2008-01-17 12:17:37

by Steve Dickson

Subject: [PATCH] [NFSD] Typo in nfsd_vers()

During my travels I found a small typo in nfsd_vers() (the routine
used by rpc.nfsd to set the protocol version(s) in NFS server)

When testing to see which versions are available, nfsd_vers() should
use nfsd_versions[] not nfsd_version[]. The reason this typo is
not noticeable is due to the fact this availability info is used in
a reply that rpc.nfsd ignores.

steved.


Author: Steve Dickson <[email protected]>
Date: Thu Jan 17 06:50:57 2008 -0500

In nfsd_vers() the NFSD_AVAIL command should be using nfsd_versions[]
not nfsd_version[]

Signed-off-by: Steve Dickson <[email protected]>

diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c b/fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c
index 1190aea..f0c66e0 100644
--- a/fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c
+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c
@@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ int nfsd_vers(int vers, enum vers_op change)
case NFSD_TEST:
return nfsd_versions[vers] != NULL;
case NFSD_AVAIL:
- return nfsd_version[vers] != NULL;
+ return nfsd_versions[vers] != NULL;
}
return 0;
}

2008-01-17 14:33:43

by J. Bruce Fields

Subject: Re: [PATCH] [NFSD] Typo in nfsd_vers()

On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 07:16:47AM -0500, Steve Dickson wrote:
> During my travels I found a small typo in nfsd_vers() (the routine
> used by rpc.nfsd to set the protocol version(s) in NFS server)
>
> When testing to see which versions are available, nfsd_vers() should
> use nfsd_versions[] not nfsd_version[]. The reason this typo is
> not noticeable is due to the fact this availability info is used in
> a reply that rpc.nfsd ignores.

Thanks, applied!

Your mailer's messing up the whitespace, though--might want to fix that
for next time.

--b.

>
> steved.
>
>
> Author: Steve Dickson <[email protected]>
> Date: Thu Jan 17 06:50:57 2008 -0500
>
> In nfsd_vers() the NFSD_AVAIL command should be using nfsd_versions[]
> not nfsd_version[]
>
> Signed-off-by: Steve Dickson <[email protected]>
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c b/fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c
> index 1190aea..f0c66e0 100644
> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c
> @@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ int nfsd_vers(int vers, enum vers_op change)
> case NFSD_TEST:
> return nfsd_versions[vers] != NULL;
> case NFSD_AVAIL:
> - return nfsd_version[vers] != NULL;
> + return nfsd_versions[vers] != NULL;
> }
> return 0;
> }

2008-01-17 23:12:05

by Jeff Layton

Subject: Re: [PATCH] [NFSD] Typo in nfsd_vers()

On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 07:16:47 -0500
Steve Dickson <[email protected]> wrote:

> During my travels I found a small typo in nfsd_vers() (the routine
> used by rpc.nfsd to set the protocol version(s) in NFS server)
>
> When testing to see which versions are available, nfsd_vers() should
> use nfsd_versions[] not nfsd_version[]. The reason this typo is
> not noticeable is due to the fact this availability info is used in
> a reply that rpc.nfsd ignores.
>
> steved.
>
>
> Author: Steve Dickson <[email protected]>
> Date: Thu Jan 17 06:50:57 2008 -0500
>
> In nfsd_vers() the NFSD_AVAIL command should be using nfsd_versions[]
> not nfsd_version[]
>
> Signed-off-by: Steve Dickson <[email protected]>
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c b/fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c
> index 1190aea..f0c66e0 100644
> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c
> @@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ int nfsd_vers(int vers, enum vers_op change)
> case NFSD_TEST:
> return nfsd_versions[vers] != NULL;
> case NFSD_AVAIL:
> - return nfsd_version[vers] != NULL;
> + return nfsd_versions[vers] != NULL;
> }
> return 0;
> }

This doesn't look right to me. With this, NFSD_TEST and NFSD_AVAIL do
exactly the same thing. Why do we need both?

It also changes the output of /proc/fs/nfsd/versions. It should show a
number for every version compiled into the kernel, with a corresponding
+ or - depending on whether that version is enabled. With this patch,
it'll only ever show versions that are enabled, never ones that are
compiled in and disabled.

--
Jeff Layton <[email protected]>