Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 19 Apr 2012 15:54:36 +0300
From:      Andrey Simonenko <simon@comsys.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua>
To:        Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca>
Cc:        FreeBSD-Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: mountd, rpc.lockd and rpc.statd patches for testing
Message-ID:  <20120419125436.GA82169@pm513-1.comsys.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua>
In-Reply-To: <857698325.1023052.1306788962581.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca>
References:  <857698325.1023052.1306788962581.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 04:56:02PM -0400, Rick Macklem wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I have patches for the mountd, rpc.statd and rpc.lockd daemons
> that are meant to keep them from failing when a dynamically
> selected port# is not available for some combination of
>   udp,tcp X ipv4,ipv6
> 
> If anyone would like to test these patches, they can be found
> at:
>    http://people.freebsd.org/~rmacklem/mountd.patch
>                                        statd.patch
>                                        lockd.patch
> 
> Although I think I got them correct, they are rather big and ugly.
> 

I have checked this update for mountd in 10-CURRENT and has two questions:

1. What is the sense to try to use the same port number for all
   supported netconfigs if specific port number is not given in
   a command line option?

2. What is the sense of specifying specific IP addresses for mountd and
   similar RPC programs that do not have predefined port numbers?

----------

One comment for netconfig related functions usage.  Each setnetconfig()
call allocates memory and depending on implementation can use other
resources, so endnetconfig() should be called before reusing netconfig
handle.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120419125436.GA82169>