[SSSD] [PATCH] ad: update membership after SIDs are resolved

Jakub Hrozek jhrozek at redhat.com
Tue Jul 22 16:19:46 UTC 2014


On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 03:32:18PM +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
> On 07/22/2014 10:43 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 09:33:01AM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >>On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 02:10:34PM +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
> >>>On 07/21/2014 12:07 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >>>>On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 01:15:25PM +0200, Pavel Březina wrote:
> >>>>>https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2385
> >>>>
> >>>>The code looks good, but needs to be rebased on top of PavelR's patches
> >>>>I just pushed (sorry, first comes, first served..)
> >>>
> >>>The problem is that the first patch is basically the same as Pavel wrote. It
> >>>just contains a comment explaining why ENOENT error is acceptable and a
> >>>little bit different debug message. Feel free to pick whatever version you
> >>>think is better, rebasing is very simple.
> >>
> >>Ah, I didn't realize this is the same place as well.
> >>
> >>>
> >>>The second patch applies correctly.
> >>
> >>OK, I will review it.
> >
> >0001: I kinda like the comment, feel free to re-send with just the
> >comment
> 
> Done.
> 
> >0002: Can you drop state->num_missing_sids? Appears to be unused, the
> >array is NULL-terminated anyway
> 
> It is used. There is a little bit of confusion because some functions
> returns NULL terminated arrays others not so we have to keep both. Looking
> into the code I think it should be possible to use only NULL terminated
> arrays.

Ah, you're right, I was confused because at one spot num_missing_sids is
used as input and at others as output, sorry.

ACK to both, then.

> Shall I create a refactoring ticket?
> 

You can, maybe it would be better to do the change in master right
away while you still know the code?



More information about the sssd-devel mailing list