From: Greg Banks Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/23] SUNRPC: rpcbind actually interprets r_owner string Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 10:18:59 +1100 Message-ID: <49CC0D63.8090004@sgi.com> References: <20090319004024.32404.68289.stgit@ingres.1015granger.net> <20090319004713.32404.63163.stgit@ingres.1015granger.net> <49CB439D.5080401@sgi.com> <994CA980-BA59-4F8E-B510-4079A175BFEF@oracle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no, bfields@fieldses.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org To: Chuck Lever Return-path: Received: from relay1.sgi.com ([192.48.179.29]:60066 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754544AbZCZXTb (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Mar 2009 19:19:31 -0400 In-Reply-To: <994CA980-BA59-4F8E-B510-4079A175BFEF@oracle.com> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Chuck Lever wrote: > On Mar 26, 2009, at 4:58 AM, Greg Banks wrote: >> Chuck Lever wrote: >>> >>> Our port of rpcbind (from Sun) assumes this string contains a numeric >>> UID value, not alphabetical or symbolic characters, but checks this >>> value only for AF_LOCAL RPCB_SET or RPCB_UNSET requests. In all other >>> cases, rpcbind ignores the contents of the r_owner string. >> >> Not that this makes the slightest difference to the usefulness of the >> patch, but it sounds like pretty strange behaviour for an rpcbind server >> to be using an incoming r_owner value off the wire under any >> circumstances. > > It's ignored for wire requests. r_owner is used only for AF_LOCAL > requests (ie a local file socket) where the kernel can guarantee the > owner. > > Sorry, I'm confused now. Consider the r_owner field in the rpcb structure whose XDR representation flows through the AF_LOCAL socket; is that used by rpcbind at all? I don't understand how the kernel would guarantee that? -- Greg Banks, P.Engineer, SGI Australian Software Group. the brightly coloured sporks of revolution. I don't speak for SGI.