From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To: Simo Sorce <simo@redhat.com>
Cc: bfields@redhat.com, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] SUNRPC: Add RPC based upcall mechanism for RPCGSS auth
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 11:02:21 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120522150221.GD891@fieldses.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1337087550-9821-4-git-send-email-simo@redhat.com>
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 09:12:29AM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> +/* numbers somewhat arbitrary but large enough for current needs */
> +#define GSSX_MAX_OUT_HANDLE 128
> +#define GSSX_MAX_MECH_OID 16
> +#define GSSX_MAX_SRC_PRINC 256
> +#define GSSX_KMEMBUF (GSSX_max_output_handle_sz + \
> + GSSX_max_oid_sz + \
> + GSSX_max_princ_sz + \
> + sizeof(struct svc_cred))
> +
...
> + data->kmembuf = kmalloc(GSSX_KMEMBUF, GFP_KERNEL);
...
> + rctxh.exported_context_token.data = data->kmembuf;
...
> + rctxh.mech.data = data->kmembuf + GSSX_max_output_handle_sz;
...
> + rctxh.src_name.display_name.data = data->kmembuf +
> + GSSX_max_output_handle_sz +
> + GSSX_max_oid_sz;
...
> + data->creds = data->kmembuf +
> + GSSX_max_output_handle_sz +
> + GSSX_max_oid_sz +
> + GSSX_max_princ_sz;
Sorry, is this did I complaining about too many kmalloc()'s? This seems
likely to break in subtle ways if we ever change one of those constants
to not be a multiple of a large enough power of 2. And makes the memory
handling a little more obscure. I'd rather just allocate those
separately if that's the choice.
But why not just include this in gssp_upcall_data?:
struct gssp_upcall_data {
- void *kmembuf;
struct xdr_netobj in_handle;
struct gssp_in_token in_token;
struct xdr_netobj out_handle;
+ char out_handle_data[GSSX_MAX_OUT_HANDLE];
struct xdr_netobj out_token;
struct xdr_netobj mech_oid;
+ char mech_oid_data[GSSX_MAX_MECH_OID];
struct xdr_netobj client_name;
+ char client_name_data[GSSX_MAX_SRC_PRINC];
- struct svc_cred *creds;
+ struct svc_cred creds;
int major_status;
int minor_status;
};
As long as that still comes to under 4k that should be OK.
Oh, I see, and you'd have to alloc/free this in svcauth_gss_proxy_init
instead of here, to avoid putting it on the stack there.
Whatever, I don't really care how the various xdr_netobj->data's are
allocated, honestly there's no crusade to eliminate kmalloc()'s, I'll
only object in a case (like the struct svc_cred field above) where it
seems obviously unnecessary.
--b.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-22 15:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-15 13:12 [PATCH 0/4] Add support for new upcall mechanism for nfsd Simo Sorce
2012-05-15 13:12 ` [PATCH 1/4] SUNRPC: conditionally return endtime from import_sec_context Simo Sorce
2012-05-21 21:52 ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-05-15 13:12 ` [PATCH 2/4] SUNRPC: Document a bit RPCGSS handling in the NFS Server Simo Sorce
2012-05-21 21:55 ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-05-22 0:37 ` Simo Sorce
2012-05-15 13:12 ` [PATCH 3/4] SUNRPC: Add RPC based upcall mechanism for RPCGSS auth Simo Sorce
2012-05-22 12:47 ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-05-22 13:00 ` Simo Sorce
2012-05-22 13:17 ` Stanislav Kinsbursky
2012-05-22 13:22 ` Simo Sorce
2012-05-22 13:32 ` Stanislav Kinsbursky
2012-05-22 14:20 ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-05-22 14:44 ` Stanislav Kinsbursky
2012-05-22 15:07 ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-05-22 15:16 ` Simo Sorce
2012-05-22 15:31 ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-05-22 15:44 ` Simo Sorce
2012-05-22 15:19 ` Stanislav Kinsbursky
2012-05-22 18:11 ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-05-22 18:41 ` Stanislav Kinsbursky
2012-05-22 14:58 ` Simo Sorce
2012-05-22 15:10 ` Stanislav Kinsbursky
2012-05-22 15:18 ` Simo Sorce
2012-05-22 15:23 ` Stanislav Kinsbursky
2012-05-22 13:00 ` Stanislav Kinsbursky
2012-05-22 15:02 ` J. Bruce Fields [this message]
2012-05-22 15:15 ` Simo Sorce
2012-05-22 15:29 ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-05-22 15:40 ` Simo Sorce
2012-05-22 22:49 ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-05-22 22:52 ` Simo Sorce
2012-05-22 15:03 ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-05-22 15:12 ` Simo Sorce
2012-05-22 15:24 ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-05-22 15:36 ` Simo Sorce
2012-05-15 13:12 ` [PATCH 4/4] SUNRPC: Use gssproxy upcall for nfsd's RPCGSS authentication Simo Sorce
2012-05-22 22:48 ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-05-24 4:31 ` Simo Sorce
2012-05-24 11:08 ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-05-24 13:19 ` Simo Sorce
2012-05-25 14:05 ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-05-25 15:37 ` Simo Sorce
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-05-25 22:09 [PATCH 0/4] Add support for new RPCSEC_GSS upcall mechanism for nfsd Simo Sorce
2012-05-25 22:09 ` [PATCH 3/4] SUNRPC: Add RPC based upcall mechanism for RPCGSS auth Simo Sorce
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120522150221.GD891@fieldses.org \
--to=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=bfields@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=simo@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).