[PATCH] Remove cached event context from irpc and imessaging

[Stefan (metze) Metzmacher]

Am 12.05.2014 02:27, schrieb Andrew Bartlett:
> On Wed, 2014-05-07 at 22:35 +0200, Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote:
>> Am 07.05.2014 05:37, schrieb Andrew Bartlett:
>>> On Tue, 2014-05-06 at 13:13 +1200, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 2014-05-06 at 01:14 +0200, Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote:
>>>>> Am 06.05.2014 01:05, schrieb Andrew Bartlett:
>>>>>> On Mon, 2014-05-05 at 09:49 +0200, Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote:
>>>>>>> Am 05.05.2014 07:16, schrieb Andrew Bartlett:
>>>>>>>> The only part of this code with a stored event context is now the
>>>>>>>> binding_handle created by irpc_binding_handle() in the client, and
>>>>>>>> only if specified (otherwise a new nested event context is created).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As far as I can see the "only if specified" case is not done in the commit
>>>>>>> and dcerpc_binding_handle_set_sync_ev() is still always called.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It already did that internally (if you pass in NULL). 
>>>>>
>>>>> But we never pass NULL, so I think it's confusing in this commit message.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> What about moving dcerpc_binding_handle_set_sync_ev() into the callers?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A very reasonable suggestion for a follow-up patch.  I'll see what I can
>>>>>> do.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks! I guess squashing this would make the patch simpler
>>>>> as we don't have to add the 'tevent_context' argument and then remove it
>>>>> again.
>>>>
>>>> I agree.  See attached, please review/push.  (I'm glad I prepared it in
>>>> two steps however, as it meant the compiler found all the calls I had to
>>>> add this after).
>>>
>>> This set of patches fixes an issue with the change in service_task.c,
>>> and implements the TODO you requested in your tree, that we remove the
>>> sync handler from the async users.   
>>>
>>> I do this in two steps so we can bisect any future issue, but you can
>>> squash them if you prefer.
>>>
>>> Can you look over this carefully, and review/push if you are OK?
>>
>> I've split them a bit and added some comments.
>>
>> There's not real diff compared to yours in the end.
>>
>> Both doesn't pass autobuild for me, even if I remove the top commit in both
>> versions...
> 
> I ran a local autobuild (of samba only) on my irpc-no-event-context
> branch, and it passed.   Do you have logs of the failure so I can look
> into it?
> 
> (I'll run an autobuild on sn-devel now)

I'm also retrying maybe it was related to the GETADDRINFO problems we had.

metze

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 263 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba-technical/attachments/20140512/e467647a/attachment.pgp>