On Apr 29, 2013, at 2:57 PM, J. Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 02:30:33PM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: >> >> On Apr 29, 2013, at 1:59 PM, "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 01:47:16PM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: >>>> >>>> On Apr 29, 2013, at 1:38 PM, "J. Bruce Fields" >>>> <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 01:04:01PM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: >>>>>> Trond's nfs-for-next now has the new rpcauth_get_gssinfo() and >>>>>> rpcauth_get_pseudoflavor() APIs, which are replacements for >>>>>> direct calls into the GSS mech switch. These APIs are a little >>>>>> more generic, and more robust in the face of unloaded GSS kernel >>>>>> modules. >>>>>> >>>>>> Instead of gss_mech_get_by_OID(), I suspect you want >>>>>> rpcauth_get_pseudoflavor(), but I haven't looked at the gssproxy >>>>>> code. >>>>> >>>>> It's doing >>>>> >>>>> status = -EOPNOTSUPP; gm = >>>>> gss_mech_get_by_OID(&ud->mech_oid); if (!gm) goto out; >>>>> status = -EINVAL; status = >>>>> gss_import_sec_context(ud->out_handle.data, >>>>> ud->out_handle.len, gm, &rsci.mechctx, &expiry, >>>>> GFP_KERNEL); if (status) goto out; >>>>> >>>>> So we need a way to get from an OID and some mechanism-specific >>>>> data to a context. >>>>> >>>>> Looks to me like we just want to re-export gss_mech_get_by_OID(). >>>> >>>> The reason for the new wrappers is to load the kernel modules >>>> properly before trying to discover the OID -> mechanism mapping. >>>> >>>> Where are you calling it from? If it's from outside of the GSS >>>> module, how do you guarantee the rpc_gss_auth module is loaded? >>>> What if the GSS mechanism for that OID isn't loaded? >>> >>> Sorry, I should have said just "remove static from", not >>> "re-export"--it's in the same module. So there should be no problem >>> here, right? >> >> OK, gotcha. Architecturally outside of the mech switch I'd like to >> see OIDs passed around embedded in GSS tuples rather than by >> themselves. > > I'm not sure what you mean. When I accept a gss context I don't yet > know what service or qop it's going to be used with, I only know the > mechanism OID. RPC server GSS support didn't need the gss_mech_get_by_OID() interface before gssproxy, so I'm trying to understand why it is needed now. But it sounds like you do need it now, so go ahead and make gss_mech_get_by_OID() global within the AUTH_GSS module. > >> An alternative would be to use gss_mech_get_by_name(), which is >> already visible, loads GSS mechanism modules automatically, and >> returns struct gss_api_mech *. For NFS, we should already have a >> clean mapping of mechanism name to pseudoflavor to GSS tuple. Looks >> like rsc_parse() already uses this API. > > We don't have a name here, only an OID. > >> Do you have gssproxy patches published in a git tree somewhere I could >> review? > > It's in my for-3.10 branch. > > Which is more or less what I plan to submit for 3.10, so I'd prefer not > to rebase it at this point. > > It looks like just removing "static" would resolve the immediate > conflict, is that right? And then I'd happily help deal with cleaning > up the API as followup work. -- Chuck Lever chuck[dot]lever[at]oracle[dot]com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
