[SSSD] [PATCH] TESTS: Add test for get_next_domain

Jakub Hrozek jhrozek at redhat.com
Tue Jun 2 13:49:56 UTC 2015


On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 10:56:03AM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> >> >+static void test_get_next_domain_disabled(void **state)
> >> >+{
> >> >+    struct dom_list_test_ctx *test_ctx = talloc_get_type(*state,
> >> >+                                                      struct dom_list_test_ctx);
> >> >+    struct sss_domain_info *dom = NULL;
> >> >+
> >> >+    for (dom = test_ctx->dom_list; dom; dom = get_next_domain(dom, true)) {
> >> >+        dom->disabled = true;
> >> >+    }
> >> it would be good to have more test with combination of some disabled domains
> >> and with or without subdomain.
> >> 
> >> There I have a question.
> >> If main domain is disabled should we return its enabled subdomains?
> >> Does it make sense?
> >
> >I'm not sure. So far the main domain cannot be disabled, only offline.
> >Only subdomains can be disabled when processing newly updated subdomain
> >list. I also think the disabled flag should only be readable by the
> >domain utility module and maybe the subdomains code, not the deamon.
> >
> >I think this question will be more valid once we start supporting drop-in
> >configurations. Then, during processing I guess we would disable even main
> >existing domains and start enabling the new ones.
> >
> Fair enough
> 
> http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/16/61/summary.html
> ACK
> 
> LS

* master: 4f97aaa2fd81e90c2d1f74d8b6619083db4061a5



More information about the sssd-devel mailing list