[SSSD] [PATCH] Allow more libldap debugging

Jakub Hrozek jhrozek at redhat.com
Wed Nov 28 07:46:43 UTC 2012


On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 11:27:03PM -0500, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-08-10 at 15:29 +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:14:14AM +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:
> > > > > This patch should not be pushed to master, but I would like to get it
> > > > > reviewed anyway.
> > > > > 
> > > > > It should be used to provide a custom build for users experiencing
> > > > > cases where ldap_search_ext would block (c.f.
> > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728343)
> > > > > 
> > > > > For example:
> > > > > export SSSD_DEBUG_LDAP_SEARCH="0xffff"
> > > > > would set LDAP_DEBUG_ANY
> > > > > 
> > > > > The attached patch applies cleanly on the RHEL6.1 branch. I also have a
> > > > > version that applies on master/1.5 if needed.
> > > > 
> > > > I have three things:
> > > > On line 98 you close the original stderr - this is not a problem, but it
> > > > is redundant
> > > > 
> > > > On line 162 you are using strtol and testing that it did not fail. Please
> > > > consider two possibilities that you haven't considered in your patch:
> > > > - the function did not fail, but non-zero value remains in errno from
> > > > previous program run
> > > > - the env. variable SSSD_DEBUG_LDAP_SEARCH contains empty string (I'm not
> > > > sure whether it is possible)
> > > > 
> > > > Other than that the patch looks fine.
> > > > 
> > > > Jan
> > > 
> > > Thanks, a new patch is attached.
> > 
> > Looks ok now,
> > Ack
> 
> It looks like this patch, although acked was never pushed upstream ?
> Has it been dropped offline ?
> 
> Simo.
> 
> -- 
> Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York
> 

See this sentence in my original mail:

> This patch should not be pushed to master, but I would like to
> get it
> reviewed anyway.
> 
> It should be used to provide a custom build for users
> experiencing
> cases where ldap_search_ext would block (c.f.
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728343)

So no, it was never pushed to master. It provides a *lot* of debugging
info and may easily flood the logs. We may want to reconsider the
submission, but I would do so only if we dedicate one log level to
low level tracing such as ldb transactions or libldb error output.



More information about the sssd-devel mailing list