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 is SMB1-only and pre-ntcreate with only 3 callers that look at
NTCREATEX_OPTIONS_PRIVATE_DENY_[DOS|FCB]. It is a bit less efficient
if it kicks in (we have to recreate the fsp), but SMB1 is less and
less popular, and this particular share mode combination from the
open&x family of calls might not be worth optimizing for.
This adds smb1_utils.[ch] as a kitchen sink for functions that can go
away once we drop SMB1.
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Signed-off-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Ralph Boehme <slow@samba.org>
Autobuild-User(master): Ralph Böhme <slow@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Thu Jul 4 15:40:31 UTC 2019 on sn-devel-184
smbd_smb1_do_locks_send() watches the file's locking.tdb record for
changes, like the oplock code does. Unlocking a byte range thus must
trigger a retry.
With the share mode cache get_existing_share_mode_lock() is pretty
cheap. We have to write out the share mode record with the current
code, but an obvious optimization will be a share_mode_do_locked doing
all this without actually unmarshalling the locking.tdb entry. And --
there's precedence for this pattern in downgrade_lease()...
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
The next commits will pass all direct "do_unlock" calls through
smbd_do_unlocking(). Why? Unlocking will later on require that we take
the share mode lock for the file in question while the unlock is
happening, and this should be in one central place.
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
LOCKING_ANDX_CANCEL_LOCK only is used in SMB1. Move its handling out
of the shared smb1/smb2 code.
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Make the data dependencies more obvious. "locks" and "ulocks" are used
only for short time spans. Any sane compiler will coalesce them to
just one stack variable.
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
The brltype only depends upon the central locktype, don't calculate it
every time in the loop parsing the lock requests
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Signed-off-by: Michael Hanselmann <public@hansmi.ch>
Reviewed-by: Douglas Bagnall <douglas.bagnall@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13938
Signed-off-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Ralph Boehme <slow@samba.org>
Autobuild-User(master): Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Fri May 10 01:14:02 UTC 2019 on sn-devel-184
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Autobuild-User(master): Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Fri May 3 23:45:55 UTC 2019 on sn-devel-184
That was the only caller of check_access outside of trans2.c, and it
passed an explicit NULL for fsp. Use the lower-level call, so we can
make check_access() static to trans2.c
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
The original names will be used with a new structure to cache mac and
cipher handles for gnutls later.
Signed-off-by: Andreas Schneider <asn@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
This reverts commit 894e5001c747ce765dad5517778dda55d7d1f4d9.
See the discussion in
https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/2018-December/131731.html
for the reasoning behind this revert.
Signed-off-by: Ralph Boehme <slow@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
All existing callers pass NULL, no change in behaviour.
Bug: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13455
Signed-off-by: Ralph Boehme <slow@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Replace with a call to files_forall. Why? I just came across this
function that only has one pretty obscure user. This does not justify
a full library function, IMHO at least.
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Ralph Boehme <slow@samba.org>
In future this will an impersonation wrapper tevent_context based on the
user session.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Ralph Boehme <slow@samba.org>
result_independent_of_operands: "(outsize - 4 & 0xffffff) >> 16 >> 8" is
0 regardless of the values of its operands. This occurs as the bitwise
first operand of "&".
So we should just pass a variable to silence the warning. However for
this, we should calculate it correctly and use size_t for it.
Found by Coverity.
Signed-off-by: Andreas Schneider <asn@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
When setting up the chain, always use 'next->' variables
not the 'req->' one.
Bug discovered by 连一汉 <lianyihan@360.cn>
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13041
Signed-off-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
dptr_init_search_op() invokes a VFS operation which is
a no-op in all in-tree VFS modules. Furthermore,
dptr_init_search_op() is not being called from SMB2 search
code, which hints that no out-of-tree VFS module needs it.
Signed-off-by: Uri Simchoni <uri@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
