[PATCH 0/2] FSCTL_SRV_COPYCHUNK_WRITE

[David Disseldorp]

Thanks for the review Jeremy...

Jeremy Allison <jra at samba.org> wrote:
>On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 12:36:59PM +0200, David Disseldorp wrote:
>> This trivial patch series adds support for the
>FSCTL_SRV_COPYCHUNK_WRITE
>> ioctl. It differs slightly from FSCTL_SRV_COPYCHUNK, in that it
>permits
>> copy-chunk requests against targets where the destination file handle
>> does not have read access.
>
>Code works but I have two requests for a change.
>
>Firstly, "bool dst_needs_rw" isn't clear enough.
>It doesn't really articulate what the options
>are here - they are really READ|WRITE, or WRITE.
>
>There ought to be a better way to articulate
>that (sorry, can't immediately think of that
>now).

How about passing through the ioctl value and putting the comment next to the read access check?
I'll repost with this logic.

>Second point:
>
>+       case FSCTL_SRV_COPYCHUNK_WRITE:
>+               /*
>+                * [MS-SMB2] 2.2.31
>+                * FSCTL_SRV_COPYCHUNK is issued when a handle has
>+                * FILE_READ_DATA and FILE_WRITE_DATA access to the
>file;
>+                * FSCTL_SRV_COPYCHUNK_WRITE is issued when a handle
>only has
>+                * FILE_WRITE_DATA access.
>+                */
>+               cc_dst_needs_rw = false;
>        case FSCTL_SRV_COPYCHUNK:
>
>is a fallthough on a switch statement without at least
>a comment showing this is intended. That's a horror and
>an abomination :-) :-).

Fair enough, will fix :-)