On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:14:07PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 09:56:23PM +0200, Michal Židek wrote:
> On 08/19/2013 09:52 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
> >On 08/19/2013 09:51 PM, Michal Židek wrote:
> >>On 08/19/2013 09:10 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >>>On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 06:42:53PM +0200, Michal Židek wrote:
> >>>>On 08/15/2013 11:01 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> >>>>>On (14/08/13 18:50), Michal Židek wrote:
> >>>>>>On 08/14/2013 04:39 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> >>>>>>>On (12/08/13 17:47), Michal Židek wrote:
> >>>>>>>>Hello,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>I think it could be useful to store the corrupted
memory cache
> >>>>>>>>before reset. We have very little info about what
was really
> >>>>>>>>wrong in the cache when it was in inconsistent
state. This way we
> >>>>>>>>could ask users to send us copy of the corrupted
cache if they
> >>>>>>>>hit this issue. It could provide some more answers.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>Patch is attached. It stores the corrupted cache in
> >>>>>>>>/var/lib/sss/mc/<cache_name>_corrupted.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>Thanks
> >>>>>>>>Michal
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Please rebase patch on top of patches from thread
> >>>>>>>"[PATCH] mmap_cache: Check data->name value in
client code"
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>It cannot be applied cleanly.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>LS
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Ok. New patch is attached. (Rebased on top of the patches in
thread
> >>>>>>[SSSD] [PATCH] mmap_cache: Check data->name value in
client code)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Thanks
> >>>>>>Michal
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>Backup of memory maped was created (gdb cheating)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>ACK
> >>>>>
> >>>>>LS
> >>>>
> >>>>Just sending rebased version.
> >>>>
> >>>>Michal
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>The patch looks good to me and I was about to push it but I wonder if
we
> >>>should call sss_log() to explain to the admin what happened and what
are
> >>>these strange files sssd created?
> >>
> >>Ok. When the copy of memcache is successfully created a sss_log with
> >>SSS_LOG_NOTICE is called. We already do enough noise in sssd logs so I
> >>think NOTICE level in syslog is sufficient.
> >>
> >>New patch attached.
> >>Michal
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >I forgot to fixup one change.. will post new patch.
> >
>
> This is the correct one.
>
> Michal
>
Pushed to master sssd-1-10 and sssd-1-9