On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 05:05:43PM +0100, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 04:59:09PM +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 04:44:46PM +0100, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > A RHEL customer was hitting this issue. To reproduce, just enable the
> > > matching rule and request an empty group.
> > 
> > ACK.
> > 
> > But I think the main problem is that we are a bit inconsistent handling
> > ENOENT and the return values. If haven't checked the whole code but
> > there are different scenarios is no entries are found:
> > 
> > - return ENOENT and do not set the return values to anything (this is
> >   what happened here)
> > - return ENOENT and set the count to 0 and maybe the data to NULL as
> >   well.
> > - return EOK and set the count to 0 and data to NULL.
> > 
> > I think we should agree on one scheme to avoid such issues in future.
> > The sysdb refactoring might be to good place to check if the sysdb
> > inferface  is consistent here.
> > 
> > bye,
> > Sumit
> 
> Yes, I think we even have a ticket planned for 1.12 where the
> refactoring happens:
> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1991
> 
> Changing the sysdb would be a good step. But then also some requests
> will quit with ENOENT and in _recv return just the error code. I added a
> note to #1991 to check explicit usage of tevent_req_error(req, ENOENT)

Sorry, I realized I forgot to send pushmail. Initially this patch was
pushed to master, but now I also pushed it to sssd-1-11 and sssd-1-9 as
this problem is tracked in Red Hat Bugzilla as well.
_______________________________________________
sssd-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel

Reply via email to