On (12/10/15 09:26), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 08:44:27AM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (12/10/15 07:42), Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> >On (11/10/15 22:00), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>the attached patches are my proposal to fix
> >>https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2829
> >>
> >>I haven't tested them past make check yet, because I'm not sure I
like
> >>them myself :) but at the same time I can't see a better way to keep
> >>track of the servers and let callers set state of servers.
> >>
> >>The most ugly thing so far IMO is the fo_internal_owner member. I would
> >>prefer to instead have a fo_server_wrap structure that would be used for
> >>the server_list, but I didn't want to do a large change before we agree
> >>the refcount is a good idea at all.
> >>
> >>The other ugly side-effect is that we need to be sure that nobody calls
> >>talloc_free on the fo_server structure. Instead, only the parent context
> >>can be freed (that's also what the first patch is about).
> >
> >>From 2f71ee096701e869ed3e4646cbf8a4bf7a380f00 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> >>From: Jakub Hrozek <jhrozek(a)redhat.com>
> >>Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 18:08:46 +0200
> >>Subject: [PATCH 1/4] FO: Don't free rc-allocated structure
> >>
> >>---
> >> src/providers/fail_over.c | 1 -
> >> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >>diff --git a/src/providers/fail_over.c b/src/providers/fail_over.c
> >>index
b076687ac6e571f7e27402fd11ac60183ea46951..b309f1c68d0f4219d4b97eb0c01416e53ea856d0 100644
> >>--- a/src/providers/fail_over.c
> >>+++ b/src/providers/fail_over.c
> >>@@ -507,7 +507,6 @@ create_server_common(TALLOC_CTX *mem_ctx, struct fo_ctx
*ctx, const char *name)
> >>
> >> common->name = talloc_strdup(common, name);
> >> if (common->name == NULL) {
> >>- talloc_free(common);
> >> return NULL;
> >> }
> >>
> >>--
> >>2.4.3
> >>
> >
> >>From 3dd31148b43d0b466c055cf637c00ea8391b694b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> >>From: Jakub Hrozek <jhrozek(a)redhat.com>
> >>Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 15:31:44 +0200
> >>Subject: [PATCH 2/4] tests: Reduce failover code duplication
> >>
> >Slightly related request.
> >Could you also merge check bashed failover test?
> >src/tests/fail_over-tests.c
> Or we can just remove src/tests/fail_over-tests.c
> if the same functionality is coverd in cmocka failover test.
>
> LS
Not all of it (at least not explicitly), but I'm fine with merging the
two. I just don't think it should block review of this set.
sure,
I didn't want to review patches :-)
LS