On 10/17/2011 07:11 PM, sean finney wrote:
I don't think smbclient's behavior is correct either though. It's
a ways back now, but at the time I compared the existing behavior of
smbclient, a couple different windows clients, and cifs.ko, and none
were really consistant with the other.
I didn't dive deep enough into this, but my XP client didn't even try
connecting, it would just go straight to getting a DFS referral, and
that seemed consistent with smbclient. How it made that decision,
though, I really don't know.
> The reference doc was not entirely specific either IIRC.
I would be surprised if it were consistent, let alone specific... :-)
But based on what the module was already doing, it seemed "right enough"
anyway, and with cleanup/refactoring was kept pretty clean in case
someone wants to improve on it in the future :)
I see. Won't ask any more questions. Thanks for fixing it! :-)
2) Shouldn't this/these patch/es also make it into earlier kernels
as it is a (not-so-negligible) bugfix?
I don't think it's super trivial to backport it before 2.6.38, at least
without massaging the patches and cherry picking a few more commits that
cross paths and/or touch the relevant api's. But there've been enough
other bugfixes in the cifs code that for our needs we just upgraded to
a backported 2.6.38 kernel and dumped the pre-3.0 cifs commit history
on top of it (we didn't go all the way to 3.0 for entirely uninteresting
reasons, you should just do that if you have the ability).
It merged easily into my 2.6.39.3, and that'll do for now. :-)
Gerlando
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
