From: Neil Brown Subject: Re: nfsd bugfixes Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 09:35:01 +1100 Message-ID: <18232.54549.271030.214405@notabene.brown> References: <1194901503-23105-1-git-send-email-bfields@citi.umich.edu> <18232.52970.213438.902011@notabene.brown> <20071112221349.GA2645@fieldses.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: nfs@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: "J. Bruce Fields" Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.91] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list2-new.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Irhs8-00056n-46 for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 14:35:12 -0800 Received: from mail.suse.de ([195.135.220.2] helo=mx1.suse.de) by mail.sourceforge.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.44) id 1IrhsC-0002fs-CY for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 14:35:18 -0800 In-Reply-To: message from J. Bruce Fields on Monday November 12 List-Id: "Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net (CC: trimmed - as Bruce says: separate discussion) On Monday November 12, bfields@fieldses.org wrote: > On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 09:08:42AM +1100, Neil Brown wrote: > > Calling nfsd_setuser an extra time does open us up for a very tiny > > possibility of an ENOMEM at an awkward time. > > Hm. Could you give an example of possible consequences? Just that you could get an ENOMEM in the middle of a NFSv4 COMPOUND. I guess that should result in NFSERR_RESOURCE and we just hope the client is able to cope and resend the remainder of the compound. Though looking at the code, ENOMEM becomes nfserr_dropit... does that mean the we would drop the whole request and the client would need to resend, possibly duplicating non-idempotent portions? Mainly, it just feels unclean. > > (Though note this is somewhat of a separate discussion, since this > particular patch doesn't add a call to nfsd_setuser().) Hmm, you are right, we already call nfsd_setuser in both paths, you we just adding the check for privileged port - doh ;-) NeilBrown ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs