Re: write_ports delfd case

[Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>]

On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 16:07:03 -0400
Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 15:32:57 -0400
> Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> > On 07/19/10 03:21 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > > Does anyone know what __write_ports_delfd() is meant to do?
> > >
> > > The block comment above write_ports claims it handles writes of the form
> > > "-<file descriptor>", which makes no sense (the file table of the writer
> > > has nothing to do with anything).  It's called only when the character
> > > after the "-" is a digit, but the names it matches against (generated by
> > > svc_one_sock_name()) start with "ipv4" or "ipv6".
> > 
> > I suspect the comment above write_ports() is not correct.  I assumed 
> > that delfd was symmetrical with addfd, but it isn't.  More likely, addfd 
> > returns a string name that can be passed to write_ports (with a 
> > preceding '-') to terminate the socket.
> 
> Yeah -- seems broken to me. Given that it clearly doesn't work and I'm
> not aware of anyone having complained, perhaps it would be best to
> remove it?
> 

Looks like 
   a217813f9067b785241cb7f31956e51d2071703a

was the offending commit.  Adding the "isdigit" test is just wrong.

It is just *wrong* in other ways too.  You really should have a host address
as well as a port number to identify a socket endpoint, even if it is the
wildcard address.

Oh well.....

NeilBrown