Re: 2.6.2-rc2-mm2
From: Tim Hockin (thockin_at_sun.com)
Date: 01/31/04
- Previous message: Kallol Biswas: "receive path with fragmented skbs"
- In reply to: Andrew Morton: "Re: 2.6.2-rc2-mm2"
- Next in thread: Andrew Morton: "Re: 2.6.2-rc2-mm2"
- Reply: Andrew Morton: "Re: 2.6.2-rc2-mm2"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 15:21:03 -0800 To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 03:08:19PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> I think this is right - the NFSEXP_ALLSQUASH case appears to be clearing
> all groups. When this settles down we need to run it all by Neil.
>
> Do we need to handle the return value from set_current_groups(), or should
> that guy be simply returning void?
set_current_groups() can fail if security_task_setgroups() fails.
> + struct group_info *group_info = NULL;
Why init to NULL?
> + ngroups = 0;
> + if (!(exp->ex_flags & NFSEXP_ALLSQUASH)) {
> + for (i = 0; i < SVC_CRED_NGROUPS; i++) {
> + if (cred->cr_groups[i])
> + ngroups++;
> + }
> + }
I though of doing this, but passed in favor of simplicity of patch :)
The original made a specific point of doing
gid_t group = cred->cr_groups[i];
if (group == (gid_t) NOGROUP)
break;
So the count loop should probably be
ngroups = 0;
if (!(exp->ex_flags & NFSEXP_ALLSQUASH)) {
for (i = 0; i < SVC_CRED_NGROUPS; i++) {
gid_t group = cred->cr_groups[i];
if (group == (gid_t) NOGROUP)
break;
ngroups++;
}
}
So that we don't assume anything about NOGROUP.
> + return ret;
The caller in fs/nfsd/nfsfh.c still needs to check the return value and do
something with it, or all this is just dumb.
-- Tim Hockin Sun Microsystems, Linux Software Engineering thockin@sun.com All opinions are my own, not Sun's - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Previous message: Kallol Biswas: "receive path with fragmented skbs"
- In reply to: Andrew Morton: "Re: 2.6.2-rc2-mm2"
- Next in thread: Andrew Morton: "Re: 2.6.2-rc2-mm2"
- Reply: Andrew Morton: "Re: 2.6.2-rc2-mm2"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
