On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 07:32:02AM +0100, Robert Schiele wrote:
> In utils/nfsd/nfsd.c we used hard coded number 2 in option parsing
> when referring to NFS4_MAXMINOR. We should use the defined constant
> instead to honor changes to that constant.
While we're at it, is there any harm to letting NFS4_MAXMINOR be much
higher? That would save the need to rebuild nfs-utils just because you
want to test a kernel with new minor version support.
It's using an int (should that be an unsigned int?), so we could make
this sizeof(int).
--b.
>
> Signed-off-by: Robert Schiele <rschiele@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>
> This is obviously a rather trivial patch but the hard coded number
> hit me when trying to support various kernels with different support
> levels.
>
> utils/nfsd/nfsd.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/utils/nfsd/nfsd.c b/utils/nfsd/nfsd.c
> index a9d77ab..c129ee5 100644
> --- a/utils/nfsd/nfsd.c
> +++ b/utils/nfsd/nfsd.c
> @@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
> case 4:
> if (*p == '.') {
> int i = atoi(p+1);
> - if (i > 2) {
> + if (i > NFS4_MAXMINOR) {
> fprintf(stderr, "%s: unsupported minor version\n", optarg);
> exit(1);
> }
> @@ -181,7 +181,7 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
> case 4:
> if (*p == '.') {
> int i = atoi(p+1);
> - if (i > 2) {
> + if (i > NFS4_MAXMINOR) {
> fprintf(stderr, "%s: unsupported minor version\n", optarg);
> exit(1);
> }
> --
> 1.8.4
> --
> 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
--
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
