Jan-Marek Glogowski <glogow@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> which is the place of the WARN call in my code. Since I also had a patch
> for a newer kernel (Ubuntu 16.04 HWE for 14.04 AKA Linux 4.4), the
> offsets are wrong in the attached patch.
>
> I just re-checked my code. I didn't test the non-WARN variant and
> assumed the code simply got inlined, so the function name is wrong.
I've just realized WARN() itself dumps the stacktrace and that your first
email said "expected" (not "unexpected")... *sigh* I was tired that day.
The reconnect logic is a bit convulted but patching where you did seems
correct. Calling smb2_reconnect with the Tree Connect command will reset
the Tid. Calling it with any command other command will end up calling
smb2_reconnect again with the Tree Connect.
smb2_reconnect(cmd, ...)
if (cmd == SMB2_TREE_CONNECT)
TID = 0, return
else
SMB2_tcon()
small_smb2_init(SMB2_TREE_CONNECT, ...)
smb2_reconnect(SMB2_TREE_CONNECT, ...)
I think its clearer and more explicit if we reset the Tid everytime we
send a Tree Con request. So in SMB2_tcon(), before the SendReceive2().
--
Aurélien Aptel / SUSE Labs Samba Team
GPG: 1839 CB5F 9F5B FB9B AA97 8C99 03C8 A49B 521B D5D3
SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
--
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
