Hi, this patch set is based on Jakub's original code. The goal was to reduce code duplication among responders - the part that iterates over domains and performs a cache lookup and data provider communication if object is staled.
The first three patches are preparation for unit tests to allow testing with multi domain environment. The forth patch is the new interface. The fifth patch enables views with this interface - I made it a separate commit so the changes can be more easily spotted.
And finally the last patch make IFP to use this new interface. Only IFP uses it at the moment so we can find potential bugs without hitting NSS and other responders.
On 11/06/2014 05:45 PM, Pavel Březina wrote:
Hi, this patch set is based on Jakub's original code. The goal was to reduce code duplication among responders - the part that iterates over domains and performs a cache lookup and data provider communication if object is staled.
The first three patches are preparation for unit tests to allow testing with multi domain environment. The forth patch is the new interface. The fifth patch enables views with this interface - I made it a separate commit so the changes can be more easily spotted.
And finally the last patch make IFP to use this new interface. Only IFP uses it at the moment so we can find potential bugs without hitting NSS and other responders.
Patch 1: Ack
Patch 2: ACK. I first thought it may be better not to share id_provider and params among all domains in create_multidom_test_ctx, but it will be probably the most common case, so it is ok. If we later need different paramaters for each domain we can create function like add_domain_to_test_ctx and call it with domain specific params. So the API is good as-is for now and can be expanded easily if needed.
Patch 3: There is some code duplication in test_dom_suite_cleanup and its multidom variant. IMO it would be better to make the test_dom_suite_cleanup just wrapper around the multidom version. We could change the function to accept domain name instead of sysdb file name. This will require minor changes in places where the function is called (s/TEST_DOM_SYSDB_FILE/TEST_DOM_NAME or similiar).
Patch 4: In Makefile.am there are some trailing whitespaces on lines 2096 and 2103 (I replaced them with dots here):
2094 responder_cache_req_tests_LDFLAGS = \ 2095 -Wl,-wrap,sss_dp_get_account_send \ 2096 $(NULL).... 2097 responder_cache_req_tests_LDADD = \ 2098 $(CMOCKA_LIBS) \ 2099 $(SSSD_LIBS) \ 2100 $(SSSD_INTERNAL_LTLIBS) \ 2101 libsss_test_common.la \ 2102 $(NULL) 2103 .... 2104 endif # HAVE_CMOCKA
Is this new interface meant to be used in IFP only? I guess not. I think it should not be limited to users and initgroups. It would be good to put TODO or FIXME label to the header file to remind us to add support for other objects as well.
In the tests, please use a macro constant for the timeout values (for example in cache_req_user_by_name_send).
Otherwise the patch looks good.
Patch 5: Ack.
Patch 6: Ack.
On 11/19/2014 05:24 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/06/2014 05:45 PM, Pavel Březina wrote:
Hi, this patch set is based on Jakub's original code. The goal was to reduce code duplication among responders - the part that iterates over domains and performs a cache lookup and data provider communication if object is staled.
The first three patches are preparation for unit tests to allow testing with multi domain environment. The forth patch is the new interface. The fifth patch enables views with this interface - I made it a separate commit so the changes can be more easily spotted.
And finally the last patch make IFP to use this new interface. Only IFP uses it at the moment so we can find potential bugs without hitting NSS and other responders.
Patch 1: Ack
Patch 2: ACK. I first thought it may be better not to share id_provider and params among all domains in create_multidom_test_ctx, but it will be probably the most common case, so it is ok. If we later need different paramaters for each domain we can create function like add_domain_to_test_ctx and call it with domain specific params. So the API is good as-is for now and can be expanded easily if needed.
Doing it in more general way would require lots of additional time which was not worth it given this is the only multi domain test so far.
Patch 3: There is some code duplication in test_dom_suite_cleanup and its multidom variant. IMO it would be better to make the test_dom_suite_cleanup just wrapper around the
I will look into the code duplication again.
multidom version. We could change the function to accept domain name instead of sysdb file name. This will require minor changes in places where the function is called (s/TEST_DOM_SYSDB_FILE/TEST_DOM_NAME or similiar).
I wanted to avoid this since that would require to change almost every test. But I can do that.
Patch 4: In Makefile.am there are some trailing whitespaces on lines 2096 and 2103 (I replaced them with dots here):
2094 responder_cache_req_tests_LDFLAGS = \ 2095 -Wl,-wrap,sss_dp_get_account_send \ 2096 $(NULL).... 2097 responder_cache_req_tests_LDADD = \ 2098 $(CMOCKA_LIBS) \ 2099 $(SSSD_LIBS) \ 2100 $(SSSD_INTERNAL_LTLIBS) \ 2101 libsss_test_common.la \ 2102 $(NULL) 2103 .... 2104 endif # HAVE_CMOCKA
Is this new interface meant to be used in IFP only? I guess not. I think it should not be limited to users and initgroups. It would be good to put TODO or FIXME label to the header file to remind us to add support for other objects as well.
The plan is to test it in IFP and expand it to other responders in later version to be sure we won't be breaking fundamental functionality. So it will not be limited to users and initgroups in near future. I tried to write is as generic as possible to make future extensions easy and safe.
In the tests, please use a macro constant for the timeout values (for example in cache_req_user_by_name_send).
Otherwise the patch looks good.
Patch 5: Ack.
Patch 6: Ack. _______________________________________________ sssd-devel mailing list sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
On 11/20/2014 01:31 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote:
On 11/19/2014 05:24 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/06/2014 05:45 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote:
Hi, this patch set is based on Jakub's original code. The goal was to reduce code duplication among responders - the part that iterates over domains and performs a cache lookup and data provider communication if object is staled.
The first three patches are preparation for unit tests to allow testing with multi domain environment. The forth patch is the new interface. The fifth patch enables views with this interface - I made it a separate commit so the changes can be more easily spotted.
And finally the last patch make IFP to use this new interface. Only IFP uses it at the moment so we can find potential bugs without hitting NSS and other responders.
Patch 1: Ack
Patch 2: ACK. I first thought it may be better not to share id_provider and params among all domains in create_multidom_test_ctx, but it will be probably the most common case, so it is ok. If we later need different paramaters for each domain we can create function like add_domain_to_test_ctx and call it with domain specific params. So the API is good as-is for now and can be expanded easily if needed.
Doing it in more general way would require lots of additional time which was not worth it given this is the only multi domain test so far.
Patch 3: There is some code duplication in test_dom_suite_cleanup and its multidom variant. IMO it would be better to make the test_dom_suite_cleanup just wrapper around the
I will look into the code duplication again.
multidom version. We could change the function to accept domain name instead of sysdb file name. This will require minor changes in places where the function is called (s/TEST_DOM_SYSDB_FILE/TEST_DOM_NAME or similiar).
I wanted to avoid this since that would require to change almost every test. But I can do that.
Yes, I also hesitated a bit when I wrote this request, but it is just one line change in every test that uses this function and it will help to remove the code duplication I mentioned above.
Patch 4: In Makefile.am there are some trailing whitespaces on lines 2096 and 2103 (I replaced them with dots here):
2094 responder_cache_req_tests_LDFLAGS = \ 2095 -Wl,-wrap,sss_dp_get_account_send \ 2096 $(NULL).... 2097 responder_cache_req_tests_LDADD = \ 2098 $(CMOCKA_LIBS) \ 2099 $(SSSD_LIBS) \ 2100 $(SSSD_INTERNAL_LTLIBS) \ 2101 libsss_test_common.la \ 2102 $(NULL) 2103 .... 2104 endif # HAVE_CMOCKA
Is this new interface meant to be used in IFP only? I guess not. I think it should not be limited to users and initgroups. It would be good to put TODO or FIXME label to the header file to remind us to add support for other objects as well.
The plan is to test it in IFP and expand it to other responders in later version to be sure we won't be breaking fundamental functionality. So it will not be limited to users and initgroups in near future. I tried to write is as generic as possible to make future extensions easy and safe.
And you did it well, but my point was that the API looks like it is able to work with all kinds of objects already (from the names of the functions, nothing indicates that they are meant for users and initgroups only). That is why I would like the have TODO/FIXME/NOTE label (probably in the header?).
It also may not be bad to create a ticket to track this.
In the tests, please use a macro constant for the timeout values (for example in cache_req_user_by_name_send).
Otherwise the patch looks good.
Patch 5: Ack.
Patch 6: Ack.
On 11/20/2014 07:29 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/20/2014 01:31 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote:
On 11/19/2014 05:24 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/06/2014 05:45 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote:
Hi, this patch set is based on Jakub's original code. The goal was to reduce code duplication among responders - the part that iterates over domains and performs a cache lookup and data provider communication if object is staled.
The first three patches are preparation for unit tests to allow testing with multi domain environment. The forth patch is the new interface. The fifth patch enables views with this interface - I made it a separate commit so the changes can be more easily spotted.
And finally the last patch make IFP to use this new interface. Only IFP uses it at the moment so we can find potential bugs without hitting NSS and other responders.
Patch 1: Ack
Patch 2: ACK. I first thought it may be better not to share id_provider and params among all domains in create_multidom_test_ctx, but it will be probably the most common case, so it is ok. If we later need different paramaters for each domain we can create function like add_domain_to_test_ctx and call it with domain specific params. So the API is good as-is for now and can be expanded easily if needed.
Doing it in more general way would require lots of additional time which was not worth it given this is the only multi domain test so far.
Patch 3: There is some code duplication in test_dom_suite_cleanup and its multidom variant. IMO it would be better to make the test_dom_suite_cleanup just wrapper around the
I will look into the code duplication again.
multidom version. We could change the function to accept domain name instead of sysdb file name. This will require minor changes in places where the function is called (s/TEST_DOM_SYSDB_FILE/TEST_DOM_NAME or similiar).
I wanted to avoid this since that would require to change almost every test. But I can do that.
Yes, I also hesitated a bit when I wrote this request, but it is just one line change in every test that uses this function and it will help to remove the code duplication I mentioned above.
Done. In a separate patch.
Patch 4: In Makefile.am there are some trailing whitespaces on lines 2096 and 2103 (I replaced them with dots here):
2094 responder_cache_req_tests_LDFLAGS = \ 2095 -Wl,-wrap,sss_dp_get_account_send \ 2096 $(NULL).... 2097 responder_cache_req_tests_LDADD = \ 2098 $(CMOCKA_LIBS) \ 2099 $(SSSD_LIBS) \ 2100 $(SSSD_INTERNAL_LTLIBS) \ 2101 libsss_test_common.la \ 2102 $(NULL) 2103 .... 2104 endif # HAVE_CMOCKA
Fixed.
Is this new interface meant to be used in IFP only? I guess not. I think it should not be limited to users and initgroups. It would be good to put TODO or FIXME label to the header file to remind us to add support for other objects as well.
The plan is to test it in IFP and expand it to other responders in later version to be sure we won't be breaking fundamental functionality. So it will not be limited to users and initgroups in near future. I tried to write is as generic as possible to make future extensions easy and safe.
And you did it well, but my point was that the API looks like it is able to work with all kinds of objects already (from the names of the functions, nothing indicates that they are meant for users and initgroups only). That is why I would like the have TODO/FIXME/NOTE label (probably in the header?).
OK.
It also may not be bad to create a ticket to track this.
I'll create a ticket when these patches get to the master.
In the tests, please use a macro constant for the timeout values (for example in cache_req_user_by_name_send).
Otherwise the patch looks good.
Patch 5: Ack.
Patch 6: Ack.
On 11/21/2014 02:52 PM, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 11/20/2014 07:29 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/20/2014 01:31 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote:
On 11/19/2014 05:24 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/06/2014 05:45 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote:
Hi, this patch set is based on Jakub's original code. The goal was to reduce code duplication among responders - the part that iterates over domains and performs a cache lookup and data provider communication if object is staled.
The first three patches are preparation for unit tests to allow testing with multi domain environment. The forth patch is the new interface. The fifth patch enables views with this interface - I made it a separate commit so the changes can be more easily spotted.
And finally the last patch make IFP to use this new interface. Only IFP uses it at the moment so we can find potential bugs without hitting NSS and other responders.
Patch 1: Ack
Patch 2: ACK. I first thought it may be better not to share id_provider and params among all domains in create_multidom_test_ctx, but it will be probably the most common case, so it is ok. If we later need different paramaters for each domain we can create function like add_domain_to_test_ctx and call it with domain specific params. So the API is good as-is for now and can be expanded easily if needed.
Doing it in more general way would require lots of additional time which was not worth it given this is the only multi domain test so far.
Patch 3: There is some code duplication in test_dom_suite_cleanup and its multidom variant. IMO it would be better to make the test_dom_suite_cleanup just wrapper around the
I will look into the code duplication again.
multidom version. We could change the function to accept domain name instead of sysdb file name. This will require minor changes in places where the function is called (s/TEST_DOM_SYSDB_FILE/TEST_DOM_NAME or similiar).
I wanted to avoid this since that would require to change almost every test. But I can do that.
Yes, I also hesitated a bit when I wrote this request, but it is just one line change in every test that uses this function and it will help to remove the code duplication I mentioned above.
Done. In a separate patch.
Patch 4: In Makefile.am there are some trailing whitespaces on lines 2096 and 2103 (I replaced them with dots here):
2094 responder_cache_req_tests_LDFLAGS = \ 2095 -Wl,-wrap,sss_dp_get_account_send \ 2096 $(NULL).... 2097 responder_cache_req_tests_LDADD = \ 2098 $(CMOCKA_LIBS) \ 2099 $(SSSD_LIBS) \ 2100 $(SSSD_INTERNAL_LTLIBS) \ 2101 libsss_test_common.la \ 2102 $(NULL) 2103 .... 2104 endif # HAVE_CMOCKA
Fixed.
Is this new interface meant to be used in IFP only? I guess not. I think it should not be limited to users and initgroups. It would be good to put TODO or FIXME label to the header file to remind us to add support for other objects as well.
The plan is to test it in IFP and expand it to other responders in later version to be sure we won't be breaking fundamental functionality. So it will not be limited to users and initgroups in near future. I tried to write is as generic as possible to make future extensions easy and safe.
And you did it well, but my point was that the API looks like it is able to work with all kinds of objects already (from the names of the functions, nothing indicates that they are meant for users and initgroups only). That is why I would like the have TODO/FIXME/NOTE label (probably in the header?).
OK.
It also may not be bad to create a ticket to track this.
I'll create a ticket when these patches get to the master.
In the tests, please use a macro constant for the timeout values (for example in cache_req_user_by_name_send).
Otherwise the patch looks good.
Patch 5: Ack.
Patch 6: Ack.
Hi, sorry for delayed answer. Some nitpicks that caused warnings for me:
In src/tests/common_dom.c:
44 45 cdb_path = talloc_asprintf(tmp_ctx, "%s/%s", ... 46 if (cdb_path == NULL) { 47 DEBUG(SSSDBG_CRIT_FAILURE, "talloc_asprintf failed\n"); >>>> here should be 'ret = ENOMEM;' <<<<< 48 goto done; 49 }
And in the same file:
66 static errno_t 67 mock_confdb_domain(TALLOC_CTX *mem_ctx, 68 struct confdb_ctx *cdb, 69 const char *db_path, 70 const char *name, 71 const char *id_provider, 72 struct sss_test_conf_param *params, 73 char **_cdb_path) 74 { 75 TALLOC_CTX *tmp_ctx = NULL; 76 const char *val[2] = {NULL, NULL}; 77 char *cdb_path = NULL; 78 char **array = NULL; 79 char *list = NULL; 80 bool exists; ^^^^^^ initialize this to false 81 errno_t ret; 82 int i;
Michal
On 11/24/2014 09:21 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/21/2014 02:52 PM, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 11/20/2014 07:29 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/20/2014 01:31 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote:
On 11/19/2014 05:24 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/06/2014 05:45 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote:
Hi, this patch set is based on Jakub's original code. The goal was to reduce code duplication among responders - the part that iterates over domains and performs a cache lookup and data provider communication if object is staled.
The first three patches are preparation for unit tests to allow testing with multi domain environment. The forth patch is the new interface. The fifth patch enables views with this interface - I made it a separate commit so the changes can be more easily spotted.
And finally the last patch make IFP to use this new interface. Only IFP uses it at the moment so we can find potential bugs without hitting NSS and other responders.
Patch 1: Ack
Patch 2: ACK. I first thought it may be better not to share id_provider and params among all domains in create_multidom_test_ctx, but it will be probably the most common case, so it is ok. If we later need different paramaters for each domain we can create function like add_domain_to_test_ctx and call it with domain specific params. So the API is good as-is for now and can be expanded easily if needed.
Doing it in more general way would require lots of additional time which was not worth it given this is the only multi domain test so far.
Patch 3: There is some code duplication in test_dom_suite_cleanup and its multidom variant. IMO it would be better to make the test_dom_suite_cleanup just wrapper around the
I will look into the code duplication again.
multidom version. We could change the function to accept domain name instead of sysdb file name. This will require minor changes in places where the function is called (s/TEST_DOM_SYSDB_FILE/TEST_DOM_NAME or similiar).
I wanted to avoid this since that would require to change almost every test. But I can do that.
Yes, I also hesitated a bit when I wrote this request, but it is just one line change in every test that uses this function and it will help to remove the code duplication I mentioned above.
Done. In a separate patch.
Patch 4: In Makefile.am there are some trailing whitespaces on lines 2096 and 2103 (I replaced them with dots here):
2094 responder_cache_req_tests_LDFLAGS = \ 2095 -Wl,-wrap,sss_dp_get_account_send \ 2096 $(NULL).... 2097 responder_cache_req_tests_LDADD = \ 2098 $(CMOCKA_LIBS) \ 2099 $(SSSD_LIBS) \ 2100 $(SSSD_INTERNAL_LTLIBS) \ 2101 libsss_test_common.la \ 2102 $(NULL) 2103 .... 2104 endif # HAVE_CMOCKA
Fixed.
Is this new interface meant to be used in IFP only? I guess not. I think it should not be limited to users and initgroups. It would be good to put TODO or FIXME label to the header file to remind us to add support for other objects as well.
The plan is to test it in IFP and expand it to other responders in later version to be sure we won't be breaking fundamental functionality. So it will not be limited to users and initgroups in near future. I tried to write is as generic as possible to make future extensions easy and safe.
And you did it well, but my point was that the API looks like it is able to work with all kinds of objects already (from the names of the functions, nothing indicates that they are meant for users and initgroups only). That is why I would like the have TODO/FIXME/NOTE label (probably in the header?).
OK.
It also may not be bad to create a ticket to track this.
I'll create a ticket when these patches get to the master.
In the tests, please use a macro constant for the timeout values (for example in cache_req_user_by_name_send).
Otherwise the patch looks good.
Patch 5: Ack.
Patch 6: Ack.
Hi, sorry for delayed answer. Some nitpicks that caused warnings for me:
In src/tests/common_dom.c:
44 45 cdb_path = talloc_asprintf(tmp_ctx, "%s/%s", ... 46 if (cdb_path == NULL) { 47 DEBUG(SSSDBG_CRIT_FAILURE, "talloc_asprintf failed\n"); >>>> here should be 'ret = ENOMEM;' <<<<< 48 goto done; 49 }
And in the same file:
66 static errno_t 67 mock_confdb_domain(TALLOC_CTX *mem_ctx, 68 struct confdb_ctx *cdb, 69 const char *db_path, 70 const char *name, 71 const char *id_provider, 72 struct sss_test_conf_param *params, 73 char **_cdb_path) 74 { 75 TALLOC_CTX *tmp_ctx = NULL; 76 const char *val[2] = {NULL, NULL}; 77 char *cdb_path = NULL; 78 char **array = NULL; 79 char *list = NULL; 80 bool exists; ^^^^^^ initialize this to false 81 errno_t ret; 82 int i;
Michal
Thanks. New patches are attached.
I also removed code duplication between create_dom_test_ctx and create_multidom_test_ctx which it seems I have forgotten.
On 11/25/2014 01:07 PM, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 11/24/2014 09:21 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/21/2014 02:52 PM, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 11/20/2014 07:29 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/20/2014 01:31 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote:
On 11/19/2014 05:24 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/06/2014 05:45 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote: > Hi, > this patch set is based on Jakub's original code. The goal was to > reduce > code duplication among responders - the part that iterates over > domains > and performs a cache lookup and data provider communication if > object is > staled. > > The first three patches are preparation for unit tests to allow > testing > with multi domain environment. The forth patch is the new interface. > The > fifth patch enables views with this interface - I made it a separate > commit so the changes can be more easily spotted. > > And finally the last patch make IFP to use this new interface. Only > IFP > uses it at the moment so we can find potential bugs without hitting > NSS > and other responders. >
Patch 1: Ack
Patch 2: ACK. I first thought it may be better not to share id_provider and params among all domains in create_multidom_test_ctx, but it will be probably the most common case, so it is ok. If we later need different paramaters for each domain we can create function like add_domain_to_test_ctx and call it with domain specific params. So the API is good as-is for now and can be expanded easily if needed.
Doing it in more general way would require lots of additional time which was not worth it given this is the only multi domain test so far.
Patch 3: There is some code duplication in test_dom_suite_cleanup and its multidom variant. IMO it would be better to make the test_dom_suite_cleanup just wrapper around the
I will look into the code duplication again.
multidom version. We could change the function to accept domain name instead of sysdb file name. This will require minor changes in places where the function is called (s/TEST_DOM_SYSDB_FILE/TEST_DOM_NAME or similiar).
I wanted to avoid this since that would require to change almost every test. But I can do that.
Yes, I also hesitated a bit when I wrote this request, but it is just one line change in every test that uses this function and it will help to remove the code duplication I mentioned above.
Done. In a separate patch.
Patch 4: In Makefile.am there are some trailing whitespaces on lines 2096 and 2103 (I replaced them with dots here):
2094 responder_cache_req_tests_LDFLAGS = \ 2095 -Wl,-wrap,sss_dp_get_account_send \ 2096 $(NULL).... 2097 responder_cache_req_tests_LDADD = \ 2098 $(CMOCKA_LIBS) \ 2099 $(SSSD_LIBS) \ 2100 $(SSSD_INTERNAL_LTLIBS) \ 2101 libsss_test_common.la \ 2102 $(NULL) 2103 .... 2104 endif # HAVE_CMOCKA
Fixed.
Is this new interface meant to be used in IFP only? I guess not. I think it should not be limited to users and initgroups. It would be good to put TODO or FIXME label to the header file to remind us to add support for other objects as well.
The plan is to test it in IFP and expand it to other responders in later version to be sure we won't be breaking fundamental functionality. So it will not be limited to users and initgroups in near future. I tried to write is as generic as possible to make future extensions easy and safe.
And you did it well, but my point was that the API looks like it is able to work with all kinds of objects already (from the names of the functions, nothing indicates that they are meant for users and initgroups only). That is why I would like the have TODO/FIXME/NOTE label (probably in the header?).
OK.
It also may not be bad to create a ticket to track this.
I'll create a ticket when these patches get to the master.
In the tests, please use a macro constant for the timeout values (for example in cache_req_user_by_name_send).
Otherwise the patch looks good.
Patch 5: Ack.
Patch 6: Ack.
Hi, sorry for delayed answer. Some nitpicks that caused warnings for me:
In src/tests/common_dom.c:
44 45 cdb_path = talloc_asprintf(tmp_ctx, "%s/%s", ... 46 if (cdb_path == NULL) { 47 DEBUG(SSSDBG_CRIT_FAILURE, "talloc_asprintf failed\n"); >>>> here should be 'ret = ENOMEM;' <<<<< 48 goto done; 49 }
And in the same file:
66 static errno_t 67 mock_confdb_domain(TALLOC_CTX *mem_ctx, 68 struct confdb_ctx *cdb, 69 const char *db_path, 70 const char *name, 71 const char *id_provider, 72 struct sss_test_conf_param *params, 73 char **_cdb_path) 74 { 75 TALLOC_CTX *tmp_ctx = NULL; 76 const char *val[2] = {NULL, NULL}; 77 char *cdb_path = NULL; 78 char **array = NULL; 79 char *list = NULL; 80 bool exists; ^^^^^^ initialize this to false 81 errno_t ret; 82 int i;
Michal
Thanks. New patches are attached.
I also removed code duplication between create_dom_test_ctx and create_multidom_test_ctx which it seems I have forgotten.
Ah, good catch with the create_multidom_test_ctx code duplication. The code looks good to me now.
ACK to all patches.
Michal
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 04:04:24PM +0100, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/25/2014 01:07 PM, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 11/24/2014 09:21 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/21/2014 02:52 PM, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 11/20/2014 07:29 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/20/2014 01:31 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote:
On 11/19/2014 05:24 PM, Michal Židek wrote: >On 11/06/2014 05:45 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote: >>Hi, >>this patch set is based on Jakub's original code. The goal was to >>reduce >>code duplication among responders - the part that iterates over >>domains >>and performs a cache lookup and data provider communication if >>object is >>staled. >> >>The first three patches are preparation for unit tests to allow >>testing >>with multi domain environment. The forth patch is the new interface. >>The >>fifth patch enables views with this interface - I made it a separate >>commit so the changes can be more easily spotted. >> >>And finally the last patch make IFP to use this new interface. Only >>IFP >>uses it at the moment so we can find potential bugs without hitting >>NSS >>and other responders. >> > >Patch 1: >Ack > >Patch 2: >ACK. >I first thought it may be better not to share id_provider >and params among all domains in create_multidom_test_ctx, but >it will be probably the most common case, so it is ok. If we >later need different paramaters for each domain we can create >function like add_domain_to_test_ctx and call it with domain >specific params. So the API is good as-is for now and can be >expanded easily if needed.
Doing it in more general way would require lots of additional time which was not worth it given this is the only multi domain test so far.
>Patch 3: >There is some code duplication in test_dom_suite_cleanup >and its multidom variant. IMO it would be better to make >the test_dom_suite_cleanup just wrapper around the
I will look into the code duplication again.
>multidom version. We could change the function to accept >domain name instead of sysdb file name. This will require >minor changes in places where the function is called >(s/TEST_DOM_SYSDB_FILE/TEST_DOM_NAME or similiar).
I wanted to avoid this since that would require to change almost every test. But I can do that.
Yes, I also hesitated a bit when I wrote this request, but it is just one line change in every test that uses this function and it will help to remove the code duplication I mentioned above.
Done. In a separate patch.
> >Patch 4: >In Makefile.am there are some trailing whitespaces on lines >2096 and 2103 (I replaced them with dots here): > >2094 responder_cache_req_tests_LDFLAGS = \ >2095 -Wl,-wrap,sss_dp_get_account_send \ >2096 $(NULL).... >2097 responder_cache_req_tests_LDADD = \ >2098 $(CMOCKA_LIBS) \ >2099 $(SSSD_LIBS) \ >2100 $(SSSD_INTERNAL_LTLIBS) \ >2101 libsss_test_common.la \ >2102 $(NULL) >2103 .... >2104 endif # HAVE_CMOCKA
Fixed.
> >Is this new interface meant to be used in IFP only? >I guess not. I think it should not be limited to users >and initgroups. It would be good to put TODO or FIXME >label to the header file to remind us to add support >for other objects as well.
The plan is to test it in IFP and expand it to other responders in later version to be sure we won't be breaking fundamental functionality. So it will not be limited to users and initgroups in near future. I tried to write is as generic as possible to make future extensions easy and safe.
And you did it well, but my point was that the API looks like it is able to work with all kinds of objects already (from the names of the functions, nothing indicates that they are meant for users and initgroups only). That is why I would like the have TODO/FIXME/NOTE label (probably in the header?).
OK.
It also may not be bad to create a ticket to track this.
I'll create a ticket when these patches get to the master.
>In the tests, please use a macro constant for the timeout >values (for example in cache_req_user_by_name_send). > >Otherwise the patch looks good. > >Patch 5: >Ack. > >Patch 6: >Ack.
Hi, sorry for delayed answer. Some nitpicks that caused warnings for me:
In src/tests/common_dom.c:
44 45 cdb_path = talloc_asprintf(tmp_ctx, "%s/%s", ... 46 if (cdb_path == NULL) { 47 DEBUG(SSSDBG_CRIT_FAILURE, "talloc_asprintf failed\n"); >>>> here should be 'ret = ENOMEM;' <<<<< 48 goto done; 49 }
And in the same file:
66 static errno_t 67 mock_confdb_domain(TALLOC_CTX *mem_ctx, 68 struct confdb_ctx *cdb, 69 const char *db_path, 70 const char *name, 71 const char *id_provider, 72 struct sss_test_conf_param *params, 73 char **_cdb_path) 74 { 75 TALLOC_CTX *tmp_ctx = NULL; 76 const char *val[2] = {NULL, NULL}; 77 char *cdb_path = NULL; 78 char **array = NULL; 79 char *list = NULL; 80 bool exists; ^^^^^^ initialize this to false 81 errno_t ret; 82 int i;
Michal
Thanks. New patches are attached.
I also removed code duplication between create_dom_test_ctx and create_multidom_test_ctx which it seems I have forgotten.
Ah, good catch with the create_multidom_test_ctx code duplication. The code looks good to me now.
ACK to all patches.
Thank you very much for the patches and the review. I would prefer to push them after we release 1.12.3 to avoid breaking the 1.12.3 release with any possible regressions.
On 12/11/2014 02:06 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 04:04:24PM +0100, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/25/2014 01:07 PM, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 11/24/2014 09:21 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/21/2014 02:52 PM, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 11/20/2014 07:29 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/20/2014 01:31 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote: > On 11/19/2014 05:24 PM, Michal Židek wrote: >> On 11/06/2014 05:45 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote: >>> Hi, >>> this patch set is based on Jakub's original code. The goal was to >>> reduce >>> code duplication among responders - the part that iterates over >>> domains >>> and performs a cache lookup and data provider communication if >>> object is >>> staled. >>> >>> The first three patches are preparation for unit tests to allow >>> testing >>> with multi domain environment. The forth patch is the new interface. >>> The >>> fifth patch enables views with this interface - I made it a separate >>> commit so the changes can be more easily spotted. >>> >>> And finally the last patch make IFP to use this new interface. Only >>> IFP >>> uses it at the moment so we can find potential bugs without hitting >>> NSS >>> and other responders. >>> >> >> Patch 1: >> Ack >> >> Patch 2: >> ACK. >> I first thought it may be better not to share id_provider >> and params among all domains in create_multidom_test_ctx, but >> it will be probably the most common case, so it is ok. If we >> later need different paramaters for each domain we can create >> function like add_domain_to_test_ctx and call it with domain >> specific params. So the API is good as-is for now and can be >> expanded easily if needed. > > Doing it in more general way would require lots of additional time > which > was not worth it given this is the only multi domain test so far. > >> Patch 3: >> There is some code duplication in test_dom_suite_cleanup >> and its multidom variant. IMO it would be better to make >> the test_dom_suite_cleanup just wrapper around the > > I will look into the code duplication again. > >> multidom version. We could change the function to accept >> domain name instead of sysdb file name. This will require >> minor changes in places where the function is called >> (s/TEST_DOM_SYSDB_FILE/TEST_DOM_NAME or similiar). > > I wanted to avoid this since that would require to change almost every > test. But I can do that.
Yes, I also hesitated a bit when I wrote this request, but it is just one line change in every test that uses this function and it will help to remove the code duplication I mentioned above.
Done. In a separate patch.
> >> >> Patch 4: >> In Makefile.am there are some trailing whitespaces on lines >> 2096 and 2103 (I replaced them with dots here): >> >> 2094 responder_cache_req_tests_LDFLAGS = \ >> 2095 -Wl,-wrap,sss_dp_get_account_send \ >> 2096 $(NULL).... >> 2097 responder_cache_req_tests_LDADD = \ >> 2098 $(CMOCKA_LIBS) \ >> 2099 $(SSSD_LIBS) \ >> 2100 $(SSSD_INTERNAL_LTLIBS) \ >> 2101 libsss_test_common.la \ >> 2102 $(NULL) >> 2103 .... >> 2104 endif # HAVE_CMOCKA
Fixed.
>> >> Is this new interface meant to be used in IFP only? >> I guess not. I think it should not be limited to users >> and initgroups. It would be good to put TODO or FIXME >> label to the header file to remind us to add support >> for other objects as well. > > The plan is to test it in IFP and expand it to other responders in > later > version to be sure we won't be breaking fundamental functionality. > So it > will not be limited to users and initgroups in near future. I tried to > write is as generic as possible to make future extensions easy and > safe.
And you did it well, but my point was that the API looks like it is able to work with all kinds of objects already (from the names of the functions, nothing indicates that they are meant for users and initgroups only). That is why I would like the have TODO/FIXME/NOTE label (probably in the header?).
OK.
It also may not be bad to create a ticket to track this.
I'll create a ticket when these patches get to the master.
>> In the tests, please use a macro constant for the timeout >> values (for example in cache_req_user_by_name_send). >> >> Otherwise the patch looks good. >> >> Patch 5: >> Ack. >> >> Patch 6: >> Ack.
Hi, sorry for delayed answer. Some nitpicks that caused warnings for me:
In src/tests/common_dom.c:
44 45 cdb_path = talloc_asprintf(tmp_ctx, "%s/%s", ... 46 if (cdb_path == NULL) { 47 DEBUG(SSSDBG_CRIT_FAILURE, "talloc_asprintf failed\n"); >>>> here should be 'ret = ENOMEM;' <<<<< 48 goto done; 49 }
And in the same file:
66 static errno_t 67 mock_confdb_domain(TALLOC_CTX *mem_ctx, 68 struct confdb_ctx *cdb, 69 const char *db_path, 70 const char *name, 71 const char *id_provider, 72 struct sss_test_conf_param *params, 73 char **_cdb_path) 74 { 75 TALLOC_CTX *tmp_ctx = NULL; 76 const char *val[2] = {NULL, NULL}; 77 char *cdb_path = NULL; 78 char **array = NULL; 79 char *list = NULL; 80 bool exists; ^^^^^^ initialize this to false 81 errno_t ret; 82 int i;
Michal
Thanks. New patches are attached.
I also removed code duplication between create_dom_test_ctx and create_multidom_test_ctx which it seems I have forgotten.
Ah, good catch with the create_multidom_test_ctx code duplication. The code looks good to me now.
ACK to all patches.
Thank you very much for the patches and the review. I would prefer to push them after we release 1.12.3 to avoid breaking the 1.12.3 release with any possible regressions.
Yes, I agree.
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 02:26:52PM +0100, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 12/11/2014 02:06 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 04:04:24PM +0100, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/25/2014 01:07 PM, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 11/24/2014 09:21 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/21/2014 02:52 PM, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 11/20/2014 07:29 PM, Michal Židek wrote: >On 11/20/2014 01:31 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote: >>On 11/19/2014 05:24 PM, Michal Židek wrote: >>>On 11/06/2014 05:45 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote: >>>>Hi, >>>>this patch set is based on Jakub's original code. The goal was to >>>>reduce >>>>code duplication among responders - the part that iterates over >>>>domains >>>>and performs a cache lookup and data provider communication if >>>>object is >>>>staled. >>>> >>>>The first three patches are preparation for unit tests to allow >>>>testing >>>>with multi domain environment. The forth patch is the new interface. >>>>The >>>>fifth patch enables views with this interface - I made it a separate >>>>commit so the changes can be more easily spotted. >>>> >>>>And finally the last patch make IFP to use this new interface. Only >>>>IFP >>>>uses it at the moment so we can find potential bugs without hitting >>>>NSS >>>>and other responders. >>>> >>> >>>Patch 1: >>>Ack >>> >>>Patch 2: >>>ACK. >>>I first thought it may be better not to share id_provider >>>and params among all domains in create_multidom_test_ctx, but >>>it will be probably the most common case, so it is ok. If we >>>later need different paramaters for each domain we can create >>>function like add_domain_to_test_ctx and call it with domain >>>specific params. So the API is good as-is for now and can be >>>expanded easily if needed. >> >>Doing it in more general way would require lots of additional time >>which >>was not worth it given this is the only multi domain test so far. >> >>>Patch 3: >>>There is some code duplication in test_dom_suite_cleanup >>>and its multidom variant. IMO it would be better to make >>>the test_dom_suite_cleanup just wrapper around the >> >>I will look into the code duplication again. >> >>>multidom version. We could change the function to accept >>>domain name instead of sysdb file name. This will require >>>minor changes in places where the function is called >>>(s/TEST_DOM_SYSDB_FILE/TEST_DOM_NAME or similiar). >> >>I wanted to avoid this since that would require to change almost every >>test. But I can do that. > >Yes, I also hesitated a bit when I wrote this request, but it is >just one line change in every test that uses this function and >it will help to remove the code duplication I mentioned above.
Done. In a separate patch.
>> >>> >>>Patch 4: >>>In Makefile.am there are some trailing whitespaces on lines >>>2096 and 2103 (I replaced them with dots here): >>> >>>2094 responder_cache_req_tests_LDFLAGS = \ >>>2095 -Wl,-wrap,sss_dp_get_account_send \ >>>2096 $(NULL).... >>>2097 responder_cache_req_tests_LDADD = \ >>>2098 $(CMOCKA_LIBS) \ >>>2099 $(SSSD_LIBS) \ >>>2100 $(SSSD_INTERNAL_LTLIBS) \ >>>2101 libsss_test_common.la \ >>>2102 $(NULL) >>>2103 .... >>>2104 endif # HAVE_CMOCKA
Fixed.
>>> >>>Is this new interface meant to be used in IFP only? >>>I guess not. I think it should not be limited to users >>>and initgroups. It would be good to put TODO or FIXME >>>label to the header file to remind us to add support >>>for other objects as well. >> >>The plan is to test it in IFP and expand it to other responders in >>later >>version to be sure we won't be breaking fundamental functionality. >>So it >>will not be limited to users and initgroups in near future. I tried to >>write is as generic as possible to make future extensions easy and >>safe. > >And you did it well, but my point was that the API looks >like it is able to work with all kinds of objects already (from >the names of the functions, nothing indicates that they >are meant for users and initgroups only). That is why I would >like the have TODO/FIXME/NOTE label (probably in the header?).
OK.
>It also may not be bad to create a ticket to track this.
I'll create a ticket when these patches get to the master.
>>>In the tests, please use a macro constant for the timeout >>>values (for example in cache_req_user_by_name_send). >>> >>>Otherwise the patch looks good. >>> >>>Patch 5: >>>Ack. >>> >>>Patch 6: >>>Ack.
Hi, sorry for delayed answer. Some nitpicks that caused warnings for me:
In src/tests/common_dom.c:
44 45 cdb_path = talloc_asprintf(tmp_ctx, "%s/%s", ... 46 if (cdb_path == NULL) { 47 DEBUG(SSSDBG_CRIT_FAILURE, "talloc_asprintf failed\n"); >>>> here should be 'ret = ENOMEM;' <<<<< 48 goto done; 49 }
And in the same file:
66 static errno_t 67 mock_confdb_domain(TALLOC_CTX *mem_ctx, 68 struct confdb_ctx *cdb, 69 const char *db_path, 70 const char *name, 71 const char *id_provider, 72 struct sss_test_conf_param *params, 73 char **_cdb_path) 74 { 75 TALLOC_CTX *tmp_ctx = NULL; 76 const char *val[2] = {NULL, NULL}; 77 char *cdb_path = NULL; 78 char **array = NULL; 79 char *list = NULL; 80 bool exists; ^^^^^^ initialize this to false 81 errno_t ret; 82 int i;
Michal
Thanks. New patches are attached.
I also removed code duplication between create_dom_test_ctx and create_multidom_test_ctx which it seems I have forgotten.
Ah, good catch with the create_multidom_test_ctx code duplication. The code looks good to me now.
ACK to all patches.
Thank you very much for the patches and the review. I would prefer to push them after we release 1.12.3 to avoid breaking the 1.12.3 release with any possible regressions.
Yes, I agree.
Can you rebase the patches on top of master? Then I'll push :-)
On 01/09/2015 10:31 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 02:26:52PM +0100, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 12/11/2014 02:06 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 04:04:24PM +0100, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/25/2014 01:07 PM, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 11/24/2014 09:21 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/21/2014 02:52 PM, Pavel Březina wrote: > On 11/20/2014 07:29 PM, Michal Židek wrote: >> On 11/20/2014 01:31 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote: >>> On 11/19/2014 05:24 PM, Michal Židek wrote: >>>> On 11/06/2014 05:45 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> this patch set is based on Jakub's original code. The goal was to >>>>> reduce >>>>> code duplication among responders - the part that iterates over >>>>> domains >>>>> and performs a cache lookup and data provider communication if >>>>> object is >>>>> staled. >>>>> >>>>> The first three patches are preparation for unit tests to allow >>>>> testing >>>>> with multi domain environment. The forth patch is the new interface. >>>>> The >>>>> fifth patch enables views with this interface - I made it a separate >>>>> commit so the changes can be more easily spotted. >>>>> >>>>> And finally the last patch make IFP to use this new interface. Only >>>>> IFP >>>>> uses it at the moment so we can find potential bugs without hitting >>>>> NSS >>>>> and other responders. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Patch 1: >>>> Ack >>>> >>>> Patch 2: >>>> ACK. >>>> I first thought it may be better not to share id_provider >>>> and params among all domains in create_multidom_test_ctx, but >>>> it will be probably the most common case, so it is ok. If we >>>> later need different paramaters for each domain we can create >>>> function like add_domain_to_test_ctx and call it with domain >>>> specific params. So the API is good as-is for now and can be >>>> expanded easily if needed. >>> >>> Doing it in more general way would require lots of additional time >>> which >>> was not worth it given this is the only multi domain test so far. >>> >>>> Patch 3: >>>> There is some code duplication in test_dom_suite_cleanup >>>> and its multidom variant. IMO it would be better to make >>>> the test_dom_suite_cleanup just wrapper around the >>> >>> I will look into the code duplication again. >>> >>>> multidom version. We could change the function to accept >>>> domain name instead of sysdb file name. This will require >>>> minor changes in places where the function is called >>>> (s/TEST_DOM_SYSDB_FILE/TEST_DOM_NAME or similiar). >>> >>> I wanted to avoid this since that would require to change almost every >>> test. But I can do that. >> >> Yes, I also hesitated a bit when I wrote this request, but it is >> just one line change in every test that uses this function and >> it will help to remove the code duplication I mentioned above. > > Done. In a separate patch. > >>> >>>> >>>> Patch 4: >>>> In Makefile.am there are some trailing whitespaces on lines >>>> 2096 and 2103 (I replaced them with dots here): >>>> >>>> 2094 responder_cache_req_tests_LDFLAGS = \ >>>> 2095 -Wl,-wrap,sss_dp_get_account_send \ >>>> 2096 $(NULL).... >>>> 2097 responder_cache_req_tests_LDADD = \ >>>> 2098 $(CMOCKA_LIBS) \ >>>> 2099 $(SSSD_LIBS) \ >>>> 2100 $(SSSD_INTERNAL_LTLIBS) \ >>>> 2101 libsss_test_common.la \ >>>> 2102 $(NULL) >>>> 2103 .... >>>> 2104 endif # HAVE_CMOCKA > > Fixed. > >>>> >>>> Is this new interface meant to be used in IFP only? >>>> I guess not. I think it should not be limited to users >>>> and initgroups. It would be good to put TODO or FIXME >>>> label to the header file to remind us to add support >>>> for other objects as well. >>> >>> The plan is to test it in IFP and expand it to other responders in >>> later >>> version to be sure we won't be breaking fundamental functionality. >>> So it >>> will not be limited to users and initgroups in near future. I tried to >>> write is as generic as possible to make future extensions easy and >>> safe. >> >> And you did it well, but my point was that the API looks >> like it is able to work with all kinds of objects already (from >> the names of the functions, nothing indicates that they >> are meant for users and initgroups only). That is why I would >> like the have TODO/FIXME/NOTE label (probably in the header?). > > OK. > >> It also may not be bad to create a ticket to track this. > > I'll create a ticket when these patches get to the master. > >>>> In the tests, please use a macro constant for the timeout >>>> values (for example in cache_req_user_by_name_send). >>>> >>>> Otherwise the patch looks good. >>>> >>>> Patch 5: >>>> Ack. >>>> >>>> Patch 6: >>>> Ack. >
Hi, sorry for delayed answer. Some nitpicks that caused warnings for me:
In src/tests/common_dom.c:
44 45 cdb_path = talloc_asprintf(tmp_ctx, "%s/%s", ... 46 if (cdb_path == NULL) { 47 DEBUG(SSSDBG_CRIT_FAILURE, "talloc_asprintf failed\n"); >>>> here should be 'ret = ENOMEM;' <<<<< 48 goto done; 49 }
And in the same file:
66 static errno_t 67 mock_confdb_domain(TALLOC_CTX *mem_ctx, 68 struct confdb_ctx *cdb, 69 const char *db_path, 70 const char *name, 71 const char *id_provider, 72 struct sss_test_conf_param *params, 73 char **_cdb_path) 74 { 75 TALLOC_CTX *tmp_ctx = NULL; 76 const char *val[2] = {NULL, NULL}; 77 char *cdb_path = NULL; 78 char **array = NULL; 79 char *list = NULL; 80 bool exists; ^^^^^^ initialize this to false 81 errno_t ret; 82 int i;
Michal
Thanks. New patches are attached.
I also removed code duplication between create_dom_test_ctx and create_multidom_test_ctx which it seems I have forgotten.
Ah, good catch with the create_multidom_test_ctx code duplication. The code looks good to me now.
ACK to all patches.
Thank you very much for the patches and the review. I would prefer to push them after we release 1.12.3 to avoid breaking the 1.12.3 release with any possible regressions.
Yes, I agree.
Can you rebase the patches on top of master? Then I'll push :-)
Thanks. Attached.
On 01/09/2015 10:53 AM, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 01/09/2015 10:31 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 02:26:52PM +0100, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 12/11/2014 02:06 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 04:04:24PM +0100, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/25/2014 01:07 PM, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 11/24/2014 09:21 PM, Michal Židek wrote: > On 11/21/2014 02:52 PM, Pavel Březina wrote: >> On 11/20/2014 07:29 PM, Michal Židek wrote: >>> On 11/20/2014 01:31 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote: >>>> On 11/19/2014 05:24 PM, Michal Židek wrote: >>>>> On 11/06/2014 05:45 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote: >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> this patch set is based on Jakub's original code. The goal >>>>>> was to >>>>>> reduce >>>>>> code duplication among responders - the part that iterates over >>>>>> domains >>>>>> and performs a cache lookup and data provider communication if >>>>>> object is >>>>>> staled. >>>>>> >>>>>> The first three patches are preparation for unit tests to allow >>>>>> testing >>>>>> with multi domain environment. The forth patch is the new >>>>>> interface. >>>>>> The >>>>>> fifth patch enables views with this interface - I made it a >>>>>> separate >>>>>> commit so the changes can be more easily spotted. >>>>>> >>>>>> And finally the last patch make IFP to use this new >>>>>> interface. Only >>>>>> IFP >>>>>> uses it at the moment so we can find potential bugs without >>>>>> hitting >>>>>> NSS >>>>>> and other responders. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Patch 1: >>>>> Ack >>>>> >>>>> Patch 2: >>>>> ACK. >>>>> I first thought it may be better not to share id_provider >>>>> and params among all domains in create_multidom_test_ctx, but >>>>> it will be probably the most common case, so it is ok. If we >>>>> later need different paramaters for each domain we can create >>>>> function like add_domain_to_test_ctx and call it with domain >>>>> specific params. So the API is good as-is for now and can be >>>>> expanded easily if needed. >>>> >>>> Doing it in more general way would require lots of additional >>>> time >>>> which >>>> was not worth it given this is the only multi domain test so far. >>>> >>>>> Patch 3: >>>>> There is some code duplication in test_dom_suite_cleanup >>>>> and its multidom variant. IMO it would be better to make >>>>> the test_dom_suite_cleanup just wrapper around the >>>> >>>> I will look into the code duplication again. >>>> >>>>> multidom version. We could change the function to accept >>>>> domain name instead of sysdb file name. This will require >>>>> minor changes in places where the function is called >>>>> (s/TEST_DOM_SYSDB_FILE/TEST_DOM_NAME or similiar). >>>> >>>> I wanted to avoid this since that would require to change >>>> almost every >>>> test. But I can do that. >>> >>> Yes, I also hesitated a bit when I wrote this request, but it is >>> just one line change in every test that uses this function and >>> it will help to remove the code duplication I mentioned above. >> >> Done. In a separate patch. >> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Patch 4: >>>>> In Makefile.am there are some trailing whitespaces on lines >>>>> 2096 and 2103 (I replaced them with dots here): >>>>> >>>>> 2094 responder_cache_req_tests_LDFLAGS = \ >>>>> 2095 -Wl,-wrap,sss_dp_get_account_send \ >>>>> 2096 $(NULL).... >>>>> 2097 responder_cache_req_tests_LDADD = \ >>>>> 2098 $(CMOCKA_LIBS) \ >>>>> 2099 $(SSSD_LIBS) \ >>>>> 2100 $(SSSD_INTERNAL_LTLIBS) \ >>>>> 2101 libsss_test_common.la \ >>>>> 2102 $(NULL) >>>>> 2103 .... >>>>> 2104 endif # HAVE_CMOCKA >> >> Fixed. >> >>>>> >>>>> Is this new interface meant to be used in IFP only? >>>>> I guess not. I think it should not be limited to users >>>>> and initgroups. It would be good to put TODO or FIXME >>>>> label to the header file to remind us to add support >>>>> for other objects as well. >>>> >>>> The plan is to test it in IFP and expand it to other >>>> responders in >>>> later >>>> version to be sure we won't be breaking fundamental >>>> functionality. >>>> So it >>>> will not be limited to users and initgroups in near future. I >>>> tried to >>>> write is as generic as possible to make future extensions easy >>>> and >>>> safe. >>> >>> And you did it well, but my point was that the API looks >>> like it is able to work with all kinds of objects already (from >>> the names of the functions, nothing indicates that they >>> are meant for users and initgroups only). That is why I would >>> like the have TODO/FIXME/NOTE label (probably in the header?). >> >> OK. >> >>> It also may not be bad to create a ticket to track this. >> >> I'll create a ticket when these patches get to the master. >> >>>>> In the tests, please use a macro constant for the timeout >>>>> values (for example in cache_req_user_by_name_send). >>>>> >>>>> Otherwise the patch looks good. >>>>> >>>>> Patch 5: >>>>> Ack. >>>>> >>>>> Patch 6: >>>>> Ack. >> > > Hi, sorry for delayed answer. Some nitpicks that caused > warnings for me: > > In src/tests/common_dom.c: > > 44 > 45 cdb_path = talloc_asprintf(tmp_ctx, "%s/%s", ... > 46 if (cdb_path == NULL) { > 47 DEBUG(SSSDBG_CRIT_FAILURE, "talloc_asprintf failed\n"); > >>>> here should be 'ret = ENOMEM;' <<<<< > 48 goto done; > 49 } > > And in the same file: > > 66 static errno_t > 67 mock_confdb_domain(TALLOC_CTX *mem_ctx, > 68 struct confdb_ctx *cdb, > 69 const char *db_path, > 70 const char *name, > 71 const char *id_provider, > 72 struct sss_test_conf_param *params, > 73 char **_cdb_path) > 74 { > 75 TALLOC_CTX *tmp_ctx = NULL; > 76 const char *val[2] = {NULL, NULL}; > 77 char *cdb_path = NULL; > 78 char **array = NULL; > 79 char *list = NULL; > 80 bool exists; > ^^^^^^ initialize this to false > 81 errno_t ret; > 82 int i; > > > Michal
Thanks. New patches are attached.
I also removed code duplication between create_dom_test_ctx and create_multidom_test_ctx which it seems I have forgotten.
Ah, good catch with the create_multidom_test_ctx code duplication. The code looks good to me now.
ACK to all patches.
Thank you very much for the patches and the review. I would prefer to push them after we release 1.12.3 to avoid breaking the 1.12.3 release with any possible regressions.
Yes, I agree.
Can you rebase the patches on top of master? Then I'll push :-)
Thanks. Attached.
Hmm, it seems that these patches make server-tests fail for some reason. I will look at it.
On Fri, Jan 09, 2015 at 11:02:58AM +0100, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 01/09/2015 10:53 AM, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 01/09/2015 10:31 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 02:26:52PM +0100, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 12/11/2014 02:06 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 04:04:24PM +0100, Michal Židek wrote:
On 11/25/2014 01:07 PM, Pavel Březina wrote: >On 11/24/2014 09:21 PM, Michal Židek wrote: >>On 11/21/2014 02:52 PM, Pavel Březina wrote: >>>On 11/20/2014 07:29 PM, Michal Židek wrote: >>>>On 11/20/2014 01:31 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote: >>>>>On 11/19/2014 05:24 PM, Michal Židek wrote: >>>>>>On 11/06/2014 05:45 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote: >>>>>>>Hi, >>>>>>>this patch set is based on Jakub's original code. The goal >>>>>>>was to >>>>>>>reduce >>>>>>>code duplication among responders - the part that iterates over >>>>>>>domains >>>>>>>and performs a cache lookup and data provider communication if >>>>>>>object is >>>>>>>staled. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>The first three patches are preparation for unit tests to allow >>>>>>>testing >>>>>>>with multi domain environment. The forth patch is the new >>>>>>>interface. >>>>>>>The >>>>>>>fifth patch enables views with this interface - I made it a >>>>>>>separate >>>>>>>commit so the changes can be more easily spotted. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>And finally the last patch make IFP to use this new >>>>>>>interface. Only >>>>>>>IFP >>>>>>>uses it at the moment so we can find potential bugs without >>>>>>>hitting >>>>>>>NSS >>>>>>>and other responders. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Patch 1: >>>>>>Ack >>>>>> >>>>>>Patch 2: >>>>>>ACK. >>>>>>I first thought it may be better not to share id_provider >>>>>>and params among all domains in create_multidom_test_ctx, but >>>>>>it will be probably the most common case, so it is ok. If we >>>>>>later need different paramaters for each domain we can create >>>>>>function like add_domain_to_test_ctx and call it with domain >>>>>>specific params. So the API is good as-is for now and can be >>>>>>expanded easily if needed. >>>>> >>>>>Doing it in more general way would require lots of additional >>>>>time >>>>>which >>>>>was not worth it given this is the only multi domain test so far. >>>>> >>>>>>Patch 3: >>>>>>There is some code duplication in test_dom_suite_cleanup >>>>>>and its multidom variant. IMO it would be better to make >>>>>>the test_dom_suite_cleanup just wrapper around the >>>>> >>>>>I will look into the code duplication again. >>>>> >>>>>>multidom version. We could change the function to accept >>>>>>domain name instead of sysdb file name. This will require >>>>>>minor changes in places where the function is called >>>>>>(s/TEST_DOM_SYSDB_FILE/TEST_DOM_NAME or similiar). >>>>> >>>>>I wanted to avoid this since that would require to change >>>>>almost every >>>>>test. But I can do that. >>>> >>>>Yes, I also hesitated a bit when I wrote this request, but it is >>>>just one line change in every test that uses this function and >>>>it will help to remove the code duplication I mentioned above. >>> >>>Done. In a separate patch. >>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Patch 4: >>>>>>In Makefile.am there are some trailing whitespaces on lines >>>>>>2096 and 2103 (I replaced them with dots here): >>>>>> >>>>>>2094 responder_cache_req_tests_LDFLAGS = \ >>>>>>2095 -Wl,-wrap,sss_dp_get_account_send \ >>>>>>2096 $(NULL).... >>>>>>2097 responder_cache_req_tests_LDADD = \ >>>>>>2098 $(CMOCKA_LIBS) \ >>>>>>2099 $(SSSD_LIBS) \ >>>>>>2100 $(SSSD_INTERNAL_LTLIBS) \ >>>>>>2101 libsss_test_common.la \ >>>>>>2102 $(NULL) >>>>>>2103 .... >>>>>>2104 endif # HAVE_CMOCKA >>> >>>Fixed. >>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Is this new interface meant to be used in IFP only? >>>>>>I guess not. I think it should not be limited to users >>>>>>and initgroups. It would be good to put TODO or FIXME >>>>>>label to the header file to remind us to add support >>>>>>for other objects as well. >>>>> >>>>>The plan is to test it in IFP and expand it to other >>>>>responders in >>>>>later >>>>>version to be sure we won't be breaking fundamental >>>>>functionality. >>>>>So it >>>>>will not be limited to users and initgroups in near future. I >>>>>tried to >>>>>write is as generic as possible to make future extensions easy >>>>>and >>>>>safe. >>>> >>>>And you did it well, but my point was that the API looks >>>>like it is able to work with all kinds of objects already (from >>>>the names of the functions, nothing indicates that they >>>>are meant for users and initgroups only). That is why I would >>>>like the have TODO/FIXME/NOTE label (probably in the header?). >>> >>>OK. >>> >>>>It also may not be bad to create a ticket to track this. >>> >>>I'll create a ticket when these patches get to the master. >>> >>>>>>In the tests, please use a macro constant for the timeout >>>>>>values (for example in cache_req_user_by_name_send). >>>>>> >>>>>>Otherwise the patch looks good. >>>>>> >>>>>>Patch 5: >>>>>>Ack. >>>>>> >>>>>>Patch 6: >>>>>>Ack. >>> >> >>Hi, sorry for delayed answer. Some nitpicks that caused >>warnings for me: >> >>In src/tests/common_dom.c: >> >> 44 >> 45 cdb_path = talloc_asprintf(tmp_ctx, "%s/%s", ... >> 46 if (cdb_path == NULL) { >> 47 DEBUG(SSSDBG_CRIT_FAILURE, "talloc_asprintf failed\n"); >> >>>> here should be 'ret = ENOMEM;' <<<<< >> 48 goto done; >> 49 } >> >>And in the same file: >> >> 66 static errno_t >> 67 mock_confdb_domain(TALLOC_CTX *mem_ctx, >> 68 struct confdb_ctx *cdb, >> 69 const char *db_path, >> 70 const char *name, >> 71 const char *id_provider, >> 72 struct sss_test_conf_param *params, >> 73 char **_cdb_path) >> 74 { >> 75 TALLOC_CTX *tmp_ctx = NULL; >> 76 const char *val[2] = {NULL, NULL}; >> 77 char *cdb_path = NULL; >> 78 char **array = NULL; >> 79 char *list = NULL; >> 80 bool exists; >> ^^^^^^ initialize this to false >> 81 errno_t ret; >> 82 int i; >> >> >>Michal > >Thanks. New patches are attached. > >I also removed code duplication between create_dom_test_ctx and >create_multidom_test_ctx which it seems I have forgotten. >
Ah, good catch with the create_multidom_test_ctx code duplication. The code looks good to me now.
ACK to all patches.
Thank you very much for the patches and the review. I would prefer to push them after we release 1.12.3 to avoid breaking the 1.12.3 release with any possible regressions.
Yes, I agree.
Can you rebase the patches on top of master? Then I'll push :-)
Thanks. Attached.
Hmm, it seems that these patches make server-tests fail for some reason. I will look at it.
Are you sure? CI went fine: http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/commit/d2/b76bbc1a45a5e1cd2310f53549e323a9cb...
Also my local tests all pass.
On 01/09/2015 11:24 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Fri, Jan 09, 2015 at 11:02:58AM +0100, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 01/09/2015 10:53 AM, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 01/09/2015 10:31 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 02:26:52PM +0100, Pavel Březina wrote:
On 12/11/2014 02:06 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 04:04:24PM +0100, Michal Židek wrote: > On 11/25/2014 01:07 PM, Pavel Březina wrote: >> On 11/24/2014 09:21 PM, Michal Židek wrote: >>> On 11/21/2014 02:52 PM, Pavel Březina wrote: >>>> On 11/20/2014 07:29 PM, Michal Židek wrote: >>>>> On 11/20/2014 01:31 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote: >>>>>> On 11/19/2014 05:24 PM, Michal Židek wrote: >>>>>>> On 11/06/2014 05:45 PM, Pavel BÅezina wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>> this patch set is based on Jakub's original code. The goal >>>>>>>> was to >>>>>>>> reduce >>>>>>>> code duplication among responders - the part that iterates over >>>>>>>> domains >>>>>>>> and performs a cache lookup and data provider communication if >>>>>>>> object is >>>>>>>> staled. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The first three patches are preparation for unit tests to allow >>>>>>>> testing >>>>>>>> with multi domain environment. The forth patch is the new >>>>>>>> interface. >>>>>>>> The >>>>>>>> fifth patch enables views with this interface - I made it a >>>>>>>> separate >>>>>>>> commit so the changes can be more easily spotted. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> And finally the last patch make IFP to use this new >>>>>>>> interface. Only >>>>>>>> IFP >>>>>>>> uses it at the moment so we can find potential bugs without >>>>>>>> hitting >>>>>>>> NSS >>>>>>>> and other responders. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Patch 1: >>>>>>> Ack >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Patch 2: >>>>>>> ACK. >>>>>>> I first thought it may be better not to share id_provider >>>>>>> and params among all domains in create_multidom_test_ctx, but >>>>>>> it will be probably the most common case, so it is ok. If we >>>>>>> later need different paramaters for each domain we can create >>>>>>> function like add_domain_to_test_ctx and call it with domain >>>>>>> specific params. So the API is good as-is for now and can be >>>>>>> expanded easily if needed. >>>>>> >>>>>> Doing it in more general way would require lots of additional >>>>>> time >>>>>> which >>>>>> was not worth it given this is the only multi domain test so far. >>>>>> >>>>>>> Patch 3: >>>>>>> There is some code duplication in test_dom_suite_cleanup >>>>>>> and its multidom variant. IMO it would be better to make >>>>>>> the test_dom_suite_cleanup just wrapper around the >>>>>> >>>>>> I will look into the code duplication again. >>>>>> >>>>>>> multidom version. We could change the function to accept >>>>>>> domain name instead of sysdb file name. This will require >>>>>>> minor changes in places where the function is called >>>>>>> (s/TEST_DOM_SYSDB_FILE/TEST_DOM_NAME or similiar). >>>>>> >>>>>> I wanted to avoid this since that would require to change >>>>>> almost every >>>>>> test. But I can do that. >>>>> >>>>> Yes, I also hesitated a bit when I wrote this request, but it is >>>>> just one line change in every test that uses this function and >>>>> it will help to remove the code duplication I mentioned above. >>>> >>>> Done. In a separate patch. >>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Patch 4: >>>>>>> In Makefile.am there are some trailing whitespaces on lines >>>>>>> 2096 and 2103 (I replaced them with dots here): >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2094 responder_cache_req_tests_LDFLAGS = \ >>>>>>> 2095 -Wl,-wrap,sss_dp_get_account_send \ >>>>>>> 2096 $(NULL).... >>>>>>> 2097 responder_cache_req_tests_LDADD = \ >>>>>>> 2098 $(CMOCKA_LIBS) \ >>>>>>> 2099 $(SSSD_LIBS) \ >>>>>>> 2100 $(SSSD_INTERNAL_LTLIBS) \ >>>>>>> 2101 libsss_test_common.la \ >>>>>>> 2102 $(NULL) >>>>>>> 2103 .... >>>>>>> 2104 endif # HAVE_CMOCKA >>>> >>>> Fixed. >>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is this new interface meant to be used in IFP only? >>>>>>> I guess not. I think it should not be limited to users >>>>>>> and initgroups. It would be good to put TODO or FIXME >>>>>>> label to the header file to remind us to add support >>>>>>> for other objects as well. >>>>>> >>>>>> The plan is to test it in IFP and expand it to other >>>>>> responders in >>>>>> later >>>>>> version to be sure we won't be breaking fundamental >>>>>> functionality. >>>>>> So it >>>>>> will not be limited to users and initgroups in near future. I >>>>>> tried to >>>>>> write is as generic as possible to make future extensions easy >>>>>> and >>>>>> safe. >>>>> >>>>> And you did it well, but my point was that the API looks >>>>> like it is able to work with all kinds of objects already (from >>>>> the names of the functions, nothing indicates that they >>>>> are meant for users and initgroups only). That is why I would >>>>> like the have TODO/FIXME/NOTE label (probably in the header?). >>>> >>>> OK. >>>> >>>>> It also may not be bad to create a ticket to track this. >>>> >>>> I'll create a ticket when these patches get to the master. >>>> >>>>>>> In the tests, please use a macro constant for the timeout >>>>>>> values (for example in cache_req_user_by_name_send). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Otherwise the patch looks good. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Patch 5: >>>>>>> Ack. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Patch 6: >>>>>>> Ack. >>>> >>> >>> Hi, sorry for delayed answer. Some nitpicks that caused >>> warnings for me: >>> >>> In src/tests/common_dom.c: >>> >>> 44 >>> 45 cdb_path = talloc_asprintf(tmp_ctx, "%s/%s", ... >>> 46 if (cdb_path == NULL) { >>> 47 DEBUG(SSSDBG_CRIT_FAILURE, "talloc_asprintf failed\n"); >>> >>>> here should be 'ret = ENOMEM;' <<<<< >>> 48 goto done; >>> 49 } >>> >>> And in the same file: >>> >>> 66 static errno_t >>> 67 mock_confdb_domain(TALLOC_CTX *mem_ctx, >>> 68 struct confdb_ctx *cdb, >>> 69 const char *db_path, >>> 70 const char *name, >>> 71 const char *id_provider, >>> 72 struct sss_test_conf_param *params, >>> 73 char **_cdb_path) >>> 74 { >>> 75 TALLOC_CTX *tmp_ctx = NULL; >>> 76 const char *val[2] = {NULL, NULL}; >>> 77 char *cdb_path = NULL; >>> 78 char **array = NULL; >>> 79 char *list = NULL; >>> 80 bool exists; >>> ^^^^^^ initialize this to false >>> 81 errno_t ret; >>> 82 int i; >>> >>> >>> Michal >> >> Thanks. New patches are attached. >> >> I also removed code duplication between create_dom_test_ctx and >> create_multidom_test_ctx which it seems I have forgotten. >> > > Ah, good catch with the create_multidom_test_ctx code duplication. > The code looks good to me now. > > ACK to all patches.
Thank you very much for the patches and the review. I would prefer to push them after we release 1.12.3 to avoid breaking the 1.12.3 release with any possible regressions.
Yes, I agree.
Can you rebase the patches on top of master? Then I'll push :-)
Thanks. Attached.
Hmm, it seems that these patches make server-tests fail for some reason. I will look at it.
Are you sure? CI went fine: http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/commit/d2/b76bbc1a45a5e1cd2310f53549e323a9cb...
Also my local tests all pass.
Those patches are good to go. The problem is elsewhere, I'll continue in a new thread.
On Fri, Jan 09, 2015 at 03:12:14PM +0100, Pavel Březina wrote:
Can you rebase the patches on top of master? Then I'll push :-)
Thanks. Attached.
Hmm, it seems that these patches make server-tests fail for some reason. I will look at it.
Are you sure? CI went fine: http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/commit/d2/b76bbc1a45a5e1cd2310f53549e323a9cb...
Also my local tests all pass.
Those patches are good to go. The problem is elsewhere, I'll continue in a new thread.
* master: * faae3d55e5cf416f16158d3b9f8c8fd475ac6acf * 96faa5ca7e395991885f3c354dfe543749b900a7 * 360a4be4266d6a72be99dfd252623dc0527f5b84 * cb4742876508a08ba90c82466c9dba708e4bf999 * 629a188ec71155911301fddc36e360831045d2c6 * acc1c0c07fc76bc05d91c0bd2f172cd638ff3546 * dbb990fb29e7178a3cce53474e48ce69ab3a97a0
sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
-
Jakub Hrozek -
Michal Židek -
Pavel Březina