On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 5:10 PM, Jakub Hrozek <jhrozek(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 04:08:03PM +0200, Fabiano Fidêncio wrote:
> So, sorry for the very long title and please, see the proposed patches
> for solving
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/3094
>
>
> Best Regards,
> --
> Fabiano Fidêncio
> From 7b04832fce0bdf7f8e86c30f60811f7d219e62fc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: =?UTF-8?q?Fabiano=20Fid=C3=AAncio?= <fidencio(a)redhat.com>
> Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 15:04:51 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH 1/3] RESPONDERS: Decrease debug level for failures in
ACK
> From ac7d4a7e6dfaf5d6c08419452b36937ac01453be Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: =?UTF-8?q?Fabiano=20Fid=C3=AAncio?= <fidencio(a)redhat.com>
> Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 15:08:09 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH 2/3] RESPONDERS: Show a bit more info in case of
ACK
> From 8d595daa03b2a8af1605744cd19d5000a9546456 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: =?UTF-8?q?Fabiano=20Fid=C3=AAncio?= <fidencio(a)redhat.com>
> Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 15:12:45 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH 3/3] RESPONDERS: Pass errno to strerror() when
> SELINUX_getpeercon() fails
I would prefer:
ret = errno;
strerror(ret)
in case we ever added another IO operation into the block which might
reset errno.
Okay. Suggestion taken.
I've attached a v2 of all patches.
There are no changes in the already acked patches.
For the 3rd patch that you suggested a change, here is the diff
between the v2 and v1, just in case it makes your review easier:
[ffidenci@cat sssd]$ git diff
diff --git a/src/responder/common/responder_common.c
b/src/responder/common/responder_common.c
index a3ad9ad..05e6cee 100644
--- a/src/responder/common/responder_common.c
+++ b/src/responder/common/responder_common.c
@@ -128,10 +128,11 @@ static errno_t get_client_cred(struct cli_ctx *cctx)
ret = SELINUX_getpeercon(cctx->cfd, &secctx);
if (ret != 0) {
+ ret = errno;
DEBUG(SSSDBG_MINOR_FAILURE,
"The following failure is expected to happen in case
SELinux is disabled:\n"
"SELINUX_getpeercon failed [%d][%s].\n"
- "Please, consider enabling SELinux in your system.\n",
ret, strerror(errno));
+ "Please, consider enabling SELinux in your system.\n",
ret, strerror(ret));
/* This is not fatal, as SELinux may simply be disabled */
ret = EOK;
} else {
Best Regards,
--
Fabiano Fidêncio