From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.2 \(3445.5.20\)) Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] session: forbid creation from Lua binary and applier sessions From: "v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org" In-Reply-To: <20180320132008.sql5vzqx2tc6ovu3@esperanza> Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 16:46:05 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <116ECE80-6641-46E8-8805-A07611D9C54A@tarantool.org> References: <20180320132008.sql5vzqx2tc6ovu3@esperanza> To: Vladimir Davydov Cc: tarantool-patches@freelists.org List-ID: > 20 =D0=BC=D0=B0=D1=80=D1=82=D0=B0 2018 =D0=B3., =D0=B2 16:20, Vladimir = Davydov =D0=BD=D0=B0=D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=81=D0=B0=D0=BB= (=D0=B0): >=20 > On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 04:34:48PM +0300, Vladislav Shpilevoy wrote: >> Lua has no access to applier or binary sockets, and these session >> types must be forbidden. >>=20 >> And after #2667 applier, binary, console and background session >> owners will be incapsulated inside corresponding modules. >=20 > I don't understand why we should explicitly check session type in this > funciton. After all, it's an internal function, never intended to be > called directly by the user, so why should we care? Just to protect from incorrect usage of API, regardless of is it = internal or not. If you propose to drop the patch, then I can drop. Have = I drop it?