From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754719AbbE1UuG (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 May 2015 16:50:06 -0400 Received: from mail-vn0-f43.google.com ([209.85.216.43]:38905 "EHLO mail-vn0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754006AbbE1UuB (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 May 2015 16:50:01 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20150528203332.GD31663@fieldses.org> References: <8d601ee8babe5239b7926542c713c58502b15e35.1429868795.git.agruenba@redhat.com> <20150528203332.GD31663@fieldses.org> Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 16:50:00 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC v3 36/45] NFSv4: Fix GETATTR bitmap verification From: Trond Myklebust To: "J. Bruce Fields" Cc: Andreas Gruenbacher , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux FS-devel Mailing List , Linux NFS Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 4:33 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 01:04:33PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: >> The NFSv4 client sends the server GETATTR requests with different sets of >> requested attributes depending on the situation. The requested set of >> attributes is encoded in a bitmap; the server replies with the set of >> attributes it could return. These bitmaps can be several words wide. The >> bitmap returned by the server is a subset of the bitmap sent by the client. >> >> While decoding the reply, the client tries to verify the reply bitmap: it >> checks if any previous, unexpected attributes are left in the same word of the >> bitmap for each attribute it tries to decode, then it clears the current >> attribute's bit in the bitmap for the next decode function. >> >> The client fails to detect when unexpected attributes are sent after the last >> expected attribute in each word in the bitmap. > > Is it important that the client catch that? Right. What is the actual problem or bug that this patch is trying to fix? Why do we care if a buggy server sends us extra info that we didn't ask for? Trond From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Trond Myklebust Subject: Re: [RFC v3 36/45] NFSv4: Fix GETATTR bitmap verification Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 16:50:00 -0400 Message-ID: References: <8d601ee8babe5239b7926542c713c58502b15e35.1429868795.git.agruenba@redhat.com> <20150528203332.GD31663@fieldses.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Andreas Gruenbacher , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux FS-devel Mailing List , Linux NFS Mailing List To: "J. Bruce Fields" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150528203332.GD31663-uC3wQj2KruNg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-nfs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 4:33 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 01:04:33PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: >> The NFSv4 client sends the server GETATTR requests with different sets of >> requested attributes depending on the situation. The requested set of >> attributes is encoded in a bitmap; the server replies with the set of >> attributes it could return. These bitmaps can be several words wide. The >> bitmap returned by the server is a subset of the bitmap sent by the client. >> >> While decoding the reply, the client tries to verify the reply bitmap: it >> checks if any previous, unexpected attributes are left in the same word of the >> bitmap for each attribute it tries to decode, then it clears the current >> attribute's bit in the bitmap for the next decode function. >> >> The client fails to detect when unexpected attributes are sent after the last >> expected attribute in each word in the bitmap. > > Is it important that the client catch that? Right. What is the actual problem or bug that this patch is trying to fix? Why do we care if a buggy server sends us extra info that we didn't ask for? Trond -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html