Return-Path: Received: from mail-ig0-f180.google.com ([209.85.213.180]:36765 "EHLO mail-ig0-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752741AbbKAWAl convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Nov 2015 17:00:41 -0500 Received: by igdg1 with SMTP id g1so45165703igd.1 for ; Sun, 01 Nov 2015 14:00:41 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) Subject: Re: [Libtirpc-devel] ANNOUNCE: libtirpc-1.0.1 released. From: Chuck Lever In-Reply-To: <563689C9.5040800@lysator.liu.se> Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2015 17:00:39 -0500 Cc: Andreas Radke , Steve Dickson , Linux NFS Mailing List , libtirpc List Message-Id: References: <56351BDA.1090500@RedHat.com> <20151101115106.54815c74@workstation64.home> <56365281.4070005@lysator.liu.se> <83C2DFA0-A11D-4EBA-8786-E247393812F3@gmail.com> <563689C9.5040800@lysator.liu.se> To: Peter Rosin Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > On Nov 1, 2015, at 4:53 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: > > > On 2015-11-01 20:26, Chuck Lever wrote: >>> On Nov 1, 2015, at 12:57 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 2015-11-01 11:51, Andreas Radke wrote: >>>> Am Sat, 31 Oct 2015 15:51:54 -0400 >>>> schrieb Steve Dickson : >>>> >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> The 1.0.1 version of libtirpc has just been release. >>>>> >>>>> In this release the SONAME has been changed to 3.0.0 to >>>>> reflect a number of changes in the API. Those changes >>>>> were needed to make the Linux version of libtirpc >>>>> more compatible with other implementations >>>> This break rpcbind recompilation: >>>> >>>> src/rpcb_svc_com.c: In function 'handle_reply': >>>> src/rpcb_svc_com.c:1298:6: error: 'SVCXPRT {aka struct __rpc_svcxprt}' >>>> has no member named 'xp_auth' xprt->xp_auth = &svc_auth_none; >>>> ^ >>>> In file included from /usr/include/tirpc/rpc/rpc.h:62:0, >>>> from src/rpcb_svc_com.c:48: >>>> src/rpcb_svc_com.c:1300:22: error: 'SVCXPRT {aka struct __rpc_svcxprt}' >>>> has no member named 'xp_auth' SVCAUTH_DESTROY(xprt->xp_auth); >>>> ^ >>>> /usr/include/tirpc/rpc/svc_auth.h:63:7: note: in definition of macro >>>> 'SVCAUTH_DESTROY' ((*((auth)->svc_ah_ops->svc_ah_destroy))(auth)) >>>> ^ >>>> src/rpcb_svc_com.c:1300:22: error: 'SVCXPRT {aka struct __rpc_svcxprt}' >>>> has no member named 'xp_auth' SVCAUTH_DESTROY(xprt->xp_auth); >>>> ^ >>>> /usr/include/tirpc/rpc/svc_auth.h:63:43: note: in definition of macro >>>> 'SVCAUTH_DESTROY' ((*((auth)->svc_ah_ops->svc_ah_destroy))(auth)) >>>> ^ >>>> src/rpcb_svc_com.c:1301:6: error: 'SVCXPRT {aka struct __rpc_svcxprt}' >>>> has no member named 'xp_auth' xprt->xp_auth = NULL; >>>> ^ >>>> Makefile:481: recipe for target 'src/rpcb_svc_com.o' failed >>>> make: *** [src/rpcb_svc_com.o] Error 1 >>>> make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs.... >>>> ==> ERROR: A failure occurred in build(). >>>> >>>> Do you have a fix? >>>> >>> Should be as simple as (not even compile-tested): >>> >>> diff --git a/src/rpcb_svc_com.c b/src/rpcb_svc_com.c >>> index 4ae93f1..38f163f 100644 >>> --- a/src/rpcb_svc_com.c >>> +++ b/src/rpcb_svc_com.c >>> @@ -1295,10 +1295,8 @@ handle_reply(int fd, SVCXPRT *xprt) >>> a.rmt_localvers = fi->versnum; >>> >>> xprt_set_caller(xprt, fi); >>> - xprt->xp_auth = &svc_auth_none; >>> + SVC_XP_AUTH(xprt) = svc_auth_none; >>> svc_sendreply(xprt, (xdrproc_t) xdr_rmtcall_result, (char *) &a); >>> - SVCAUTH_DESTROY(xprt->xp_auth); >>> - xprt->xp_auth = NULL; >>> done: >>> if (buffer) >>> free(buffer); >>> >>> But that breaks compatibility with earlier libtirpc of course… >>> >> #if defined(SVC_XP_AUTH) >> SVC_XP_AUTH(xprt) = svc_auth_none; >> #else >> >> . . . >> >> #endif >> >> But I wonder if that’s even necessary now. See rpcbind >> commit 86036582c001. >> > Yes, it is fishy to clobber the server auth stuff, so it is probably best to just zap > the svc_auth_none assignment altogether. However, the core initializes the > server auth to svc_auth_none at the beginning of handling each separate call, > so if you somehow use a xprt to send replies before it has taken a call (is that > even possible?), there will be no server auth. In that very dubious case, the > assignment is essential. > > I have not looked at the rpcbind code in any depth whatsoever and don't know > anything about the semantics of this "handle_reply" function. But, since it is > a "reply", there will presumably have been a preceding "call", presumably on > the same transport, in which case the server auth have been initialized. So, it > is safe to drop the svc_auth_none assignment. Presumably. :-) The original 2012 rpcbind fix smells a little like a workaround for a libtirpc bug. It would be nice if there was a unit test somewhere to confirm that setting xp_auth is no longer needed with the current libtirpc (or help us ferret out the libtirpc bug if it still exists). -- Chuck Lever chucklever@gmail.com