On Tue, 2006-06-20 at 08:52 -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote: > On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 05:21:24PM +1000, James Peach wrote: > > On Tue, 2006-06-20 at 02:38 +0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Author: jra > > > Date: 2006-06-20 02:38:28 +0000 (Tue, 20 Jun 2006) > > > New Revision: 16397 > > > > > > WebSVN: > > > http://websvn.samba.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi?view=rev&root=samba&rev=16397 > > > > > > Log: > > > Fix Klocwork #11767 and drasticly simplify the > > > logic in smbd/process.c. All interested (Volker, > > > Jerry, James etc). PLEASE REVIEW THIS CHANGE. > > > The logic should be identical but *much* easier > > > to follow and change (and shouldn't confuse Klockwork :-). > > > > You lost the AS_GUEST flag clearing on purpose? > > Yes. If you look at the SMB definition table (function mapper) > you will see that if AS_USER is set then AS_GUEST is *never* > set.
Could you add an SMB_ASSERT to that effect? if (flags) { SMB_ASSERT((flags & AS_USER) ? !(flags & AS_GUEST) : (flags & AS_GUEST) ) } > This makes that clause impossible to be executed. Agreed (provided no-one ever adds AS_USER | AS_GUEST to smb_messages). -- James Peach | [EMAIL PROTECTED]