> -----Original Message----- > From: Benny Halevy [mailto:bhalevy@xxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2009 7:35 AM > To: Labiaga, Ricardo > Cc: Myklebust, Trond; pnfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-nfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/14] SQUASHME: nfs41: sunrpc: Don't skip past the > RPC call direction > > On Jun. 12, 2009, 1:54 -0400, Ricardo Labiaga <Ricardo.Labiaga@xxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > [squash with: nfs41: Skippast the RPC call direction] > > > > xs_tcp_read_data() has been modified to include the RPC call direction > in the > > XDR buffer. We need to read the direction during the header > verification. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ricardo Labiaga <Ricardo.Labiaga@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > net/sunrpc/clnt.c | 12 ++++++------ > > 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/net/sunrpc/clnt.c b/net/sunrpc/clnt.c > > index e7fffd2..d5a85a9 100644 > > --- a/net/sunrpc/clnt.c > > +++ b/net/sunrpc/clnt.c > > @@ -1507,12 +1507,12 @@ rpc_verify_header(struct rpc_task *task) > > if ((len -= 3) < 0) > > goto out_overflow; > > > > - /* > > - * Skip the XID and call direction. > > - * The underlying transport has read the XID and RPC call direction > > - * to determine this is an RPC reply. > > - */ > > - p += 2; > > + p += 1; /* skip XID */ > > + if ((n = ntohl(*p++)) != RPC_REPLY) { > > + dprintk("RPC: %5u %s: not an RPC reply: %x\n", > > + task->tk_pid, __func__, n); > > + goto out_garbage; > > + } > > > > if ((n = ntohl(*p++)) != RPC_MSG_ACCEPTED) { > > if (--len < 0) > > BTW, for bisectability reasons it looks like this patch needs to > be part of the previous patch: > "[PATCH 09/14] SQUASHME: nfs41: sunrpc: Add RPC direction back into the > XDR buffer" > Otherwise it introduces a bug that this patch fixes. > (just a nit, not that it matters much if both are to be squashed > into the same patch eventually) > This patch obliterates the patch that introduced this functionality completely. It removes the changes made by the original patch " nfs41: Skip past the RPC call direction" line by line. The reason it's a separate patch is because it makes the original patch disappear - we'll never submit it. I was intending to simply remove the initial patch (and this one) using git-rebase this week at bakeathon. - ricardo > Benny -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
