On 10/14/2015 01:07 PM, Pavel Reichl wrote:
On 10/14/2015 01:01 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 12:51:39PM +0200, Sumit Bose wrote:
[snip]
>> So far I liked the flags attribute which controls the
behaviour of
>> sdap_get_generic_ext_send() best (and I agree that allow_paging should
>> be include in the flags, but only for sdap_get_generic_ext_send() not
>> the "higher" level calls). Mainly because it scales, i.e. it can be
used
>> in future to control sdap_get_generic_ext_send() even more.
>>
[snip]
>> If you think this is all too much for the issue at hand
(ignoring a
>> debug message) especially for versions that are already released what
>> about always ignoring the message (or only displaying with
>> SSSDBG_TRACE_ALL) if state->sizelimit != 0, i.e. explicitly set?
>
> No, I don't really mind, I think we already spent too much time
> discussing this simple patch.
>
> If you like the flags best, let's push the flags..
> _______________________________________________
OK, I'll send updated patch reflecting comments relating 'flags' patch.
_______________________________________________
Please see updated patch set.
1st patch adds flag to control silencing of warning
2nd patch makes allow_paging part of flag
3rd patch removes unused parameter 'attrsonly' from function
sdap_get_and_parse_generic_send()
4rd patch makes attrsonly in sdap_get_generic_ext_state to be part of flag
If any of patches 2,3,4 is too controversial feel free to ignore it, I can send it later
in separate thread.
Thanks!