From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 11 10:38:07 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03008106567D for ; Fri, 11 Jun 2010 10:38:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from simon@comsys.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua) Received: from comsys.kpi.ua (comsys.kpi.ua [77.47.192.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC61D8FC19 for ; Fri, 11 Jun 2010 10:38:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pm513-1.comsys.kpi.ua ([10.18.52.101] helo=pm513-1.comsys.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua) by comsys.kpi.ua with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1ON1ci-00085B-7r; Fri, 11 Jun 2010 13:38:04 +0300 Received: by pm513-1.comsys.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua (Postfix, from userid 1001) id E37B11CC0B; Fri, 11 Jun 2010 13:38:03 +0300 (EEST) Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 13:38:03 +0300 From: Andrey Simonenko To: Rick Macklem Message-ID: <20100611103803.GA1855@pm513-1.comsys.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Authenticated-User: simon@comsys.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua X-Authenticator: plain X-Sender-Verify: SUCCEEDED (sender exists & accepts mail) X-Exim-Version: 4.63 (build at 06-Jan-2007 23:14:37) X-Date: 2010-06-11 13:38:04 X-Connected-IP: 10.18.52.101:11436 X-Message-Linecount: 30 X-Body-Linecount: 15 X-Message-Size: 1422 X-Body-Size: 729 Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Testers: NFSv3 support for pxeboot for nfs diskless root X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 10:38:07 -0000 On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 07:38:24PM -0400, Rick Macklem wrote: > I put 3 patches (you need to apply them all) here: > http://people.freebsd.org/~rmacklem/nfsdiskless-patches/ > > They convert lib/libstand/nfs.c and pxeboot to use NFSv3 instead > of NFSv2 (unless built with OLD_NFSV2 defined). Initial test > reports have been good. (one has it working ok and the other has > a problem in an area not related to the patches, it appears) > > So, if others are interested in testing these, it would be > appreciated, rick Shouldn't return values from malloc() calls be checked? Also additional checks for NULL values before free() calls can be removed, at least this will reduce size of code. There is PR/83424 related to this.