IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
This allows the calling the following sequence of dbwrap functions:
dbwrap_delete_record(rec);
data = dbwrap_record_get_value(rec);
without triggering the assert rec->value_valid inside dbwrap_record_get_value().
Note that dbwrap_record_storev() continues to invalidate the record, so this
change somewhat blurs our semantics.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14882
Signed-off-by: Ralph Boehme <slow@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Autobuild-User(master): Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Thu Nov 4 19:49:47 UTC 2021 on sn-devel-184
Small simplification, this has not been used since 2014 when the
notifyd went in. Can easily be added if needed again.
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
These flags provide insert-new and overwrite-existing record semantics
respectively.
Signed-off-by: David Disseldorp <ddiss@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Directly pass the database name and lock order to the core functions,
avoid passing struct db_context.
In the next steps these functions will become public: locking.tdb will
be based on g_lock.c to avoid holding a tdb-level locking.tdb mutex
while doing complex file system operations like unlink() which can
take ages on FAT for example.
This means that g_lock.c will participate in the dbwrap lock order
protection and needs access to dbwrap_lock_order_[un]lock() without
providing a direct db_context.
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
After dbwrap_record_storev()/delete(), dbwrap_record_get_value()
information is stale. Assert on the attempt to re-fetch data after it
became stale. This can't protect against someone copying the result
from dbwrap_record_get_value() somewhere else, but it's better than
nothing.
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
I want to reduce dbwrap_record_get_value(). It makes the caller believe it can
make a copy of the TDB_DATA returned and that the value remains constant. It's
not, as you can always do a dbwrap_record_store().
This patch removes one requirement for getting the value out of a
db_record via dbwrap_record_get_value(). You can still make a copy, but from an
API perspective to me it's more obvious that "value" as a parameter to the
callback has a limited lifetime.
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
For really large keys (that probably don't exist), use dump_data()
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Probably not required, but looks safer and gives static checkers less
reason to complain about potentially uninitialized variable reads
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
At least as of 2ac9d0afa6 ctdb does not care about db prios anymore
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Fixes:
lib/dbwrap/dbwrap.c:645:4: warning: Null pointer passed as an argument to a 'nonnull' parameter <--[clang]
memcpy(p, dbufs[i].dptr, thislen);
Signed-off-by: Noel Power <noel.power@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: Gary Lockyer <gary@catalyst.net.nz>
Fixes:
lib/dbwrap/dbwrap.c:533:4: warning: 2nd function call argument is an uninitialized value <--[clang]
dbwrap_lock_order_unlock(db, lockptr);
^
Signed-off-by: Noel Power <noel.power@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: Gary Lockyer <gary@catalyst.net.nz>
Fix ubsan warning null pointer passed as argument 2 when the source
pointer is NULL. The calls to memcpy are now guarded by an
if (len > 0)
Signed-off-by: Gary Lockyer <gary@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andreas Schneider <asn@samba.org>
Autobuild-User(master): Gary Lockyer <gary@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Mon May 27 01:29:48 UTC 2019 on sn-devel-184
This is the way we do it right now, avoid confusion why "tmp" might be
needed
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
IIRC there are platforms that don't like memcpy() with len=0.
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
We've already retrieved "ctx" in the callers of db_tdb_fetch_locked_internal().
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Ralph Boehme <slow@samba.org>
At least for me this improves readability somewhat. No change in
behaviour.
Signed-off-by: Ralph Boehme <slow@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Signed-off-by: Timur I. Bakeyev <timur@iXsystems.com>
Reviewed-by: Ralph Boehme <slow@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Autobuild-User(master): Ralph Böhme <slow@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Wed May 16 21:29:24 CEST 2018 on sn-devel-144
With a proper implementation this enables modifications without
having to allocate a record. In really performance sensitive code
paths this matters.
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Ralph Boehme <slow@samba.org>
This will allow dbwrap_do_locked to check the order without talloc
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Ralph Boehme <slow@samba.org>
Convert all implementors of dbwrap_store to a storev-style call
by using the dbwrap_merge_dbufs call
For dbwrap_tdb, this matches tdb_storev.
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Ralph Boehme <slow@samba.org>
