On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 14:36 -0400, Scott Lovenberg wrote: > On 3/21/2012 2:33 PM, Sachin Prabhu wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 13:38 -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > >> On Fri, 09 Mar 2012 15:33:17 +0000 > >> Sachin Prabhu<sprabhu@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >>> Use the standard token parser instead of the long if confidtion to parse > >>> cifs mount options. > >>> > >>> This was first proposed by Scott Lovenberg > >>> http://lists.samba.org/archive/linux-cifs-client/2010-May/006079.html > >>> > >>> Mount options have been grouped together in terms of their input types. > >>> Aliases for username, password, domain and credentials have been added. > >>> The password parser has been modified to make it easier to read. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Sachin Prabhu<sprabhu@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >> > >> In testing this today, I found a problem. I tried to mount up a share > >> with sec=none as the options. With that, I got this error: > >> > >> CIFS: Unknown mount option pass= > >> > >> The problem is that the mount.cifs helper will pass a blank "pass=" > >> option to the kernel. It seems like the standard option parser doesn't > >> have a way to allow you to specify an optional argument. That may need > >> to be added in order for this to work. > > > > We could use it in this manner. > > > > ---- > > Allow mount option pass to be a blank value. > > > > When using sec=none, the mount.cifs helper will pass a blank 'pass=' > > mount option. This should be handled by the parser. > > > > Signed-off-by: Sachin Prabhu<sprabhu@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > fs/cifs/connect.c | 7 +++++++ > > 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/cifs/connect.c b/fs/cifs/connect.c > > index 8f83ea0..831f242 100644 > > --- a/fs/cifs/connect.c > > +++ b/fs/cifs/connect.c > > @@ -107,6 +107,9 @@ enum { > > /* Mount options to be ignored */ > > Opt_ignore, > > > > + /* Options which could be blank */ > > + Opt_blank_pass, > > + > > Opt_err > > }; > > > > @@ -180,6 +183,7 @@ static const match_table_t cifs_mount_option_tokens = { > > > > { Opt_user, "user=%s" }, > > { Opt_user, "username=%s" }, > > + { Opt_blank_pass, "pass=" }, > > { Opt_pass, "pass=%s" }, > > { Opt_pass, "password=%s" }, > > { Opt_ip, "ip=%s" }, > > @@ -1546,6 +1550,9 @@ cifs_parse_mount_options(const char *mountdata, const char *devname, > > } > > vol->nullauth = 0; > > break; > > + case Opt_blank_pass: > > + vol->password = NULL; > > + break; > > case Opt_pass: > > /* passwords have to be handled differently > > * to allow the character used for deliminator > Are there any other options that are implicitly set? Or, more > generally, will this solution scale? For a one off case like this, a solution like this is acceptable. If there are more number of such options where we can could pass a blank, we could add some code to make parsing them easier. I don't see us facing much problems scaling here. Sachin Prabhu -- 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
