#161 Add unchecked DFS root

[davelil4]

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features

  • Added an advanced, non‑validating access option for DFS root tree references to enable faster operations for expert workflows (use with caution).

• Chores

  • Updated time-handling library for minor improvements and extended macro support.

_{✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.}

Related to issue #161

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

Adds an unchecked accessor as_dfs_tree_unchecked(&self) -> DfsRootTreeRef<'_> to Tree and bumps the time dependency version in Cargo.toml.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
DFS tree unchecked accessor crates/smb/src/tree.rs	Added pub fn as_dfs_tree_unchecked(&self) -> DfsRootTreeRef<'_>: returns a DFS root reference without verifying is_dfs_root, with doc comment noting non-checking behavior and potential misuse.
Dependency update Cargo.toml	Updated time crate version from 0.3.37 to 0.3.45 and enabled ["macros"] feature.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes

Possibly related issues

• Add unchecked DFS tree return method to support DFS referral queries via IPC$ shares #161 — Adds the same unchecked DFS-tree accessor method requested in the issue.

Poem

🐰 I hop through branches with nimble feet,
An unchecked doorway, quick and neat.
A DFS root I fetch with cheer,
No guards to slow this rabbit here.
🌿✨

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title 'Add unchecked DFS root' clearly and concisely summarizes the main change: adding a new unchecked DFS root method to the Tree struct.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	Docstring coverage is 100.00% which is sufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment

Tip

🧪 Unit Test Generation v2 is now available!

We have significantly improved our unit test generation capabilities.

To enable: Add this to your .coderabbit.yaml configuration:

reviews:
  finishing_touches:
    unit_tests:
      enabled: true

Try it out by using the @coderabbitai generate unit tests command on your code files or under ✨ Finishing Touches on the walkthrough!

Have feedback? Share your thoughts on our Discord thread!

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR adds an unchecked variant for obtaining a DFS tree reference, allowing DFS operations on trees that may not be marked as DFS roots (such as IPC$ shares on DFS namespaces).

Changes:

• Added as_dfs_tree_unchecked() method that bypasses DFS root validation
• Accidentally corrupted the shebang line in a shell script (critical bug)

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

File	Description
crates/smb/src/tree.rs	Adds new as_dfs_tree_unchecked() method with appropriate documentation warning users about potential errors
crates/smb-transport/scripts/ksmbd.sh	Contains a critical bug where a git command was accidentally prepended to the shebang line

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

🤖 Fix all issues with AI agents

In `@crates/smb-transport/scripts/ksmbd.sh`:
- Line 1: Replace the accidental git command that appears at the top of the
script with the proper shebang so the script can execute correctly: change the
first line containing "git push --set-upstream origin
161-add-unchecked-dfs-root#!/bin/bash" to a single shebang line "#!/bin/bash" at
the very top of the file (ksmbd.sh), ensure there are no stray git commands or
text before the shebang, and verify the script file mode is executable.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 1 out of 1 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

[davelil4]

@afiffon Should I worry about the failed build?

[afiffon]

@afiffon Should I worry about the failed build?

Yep, since we'd like to have the changes merged. If you may fix time to 0.3.45, this should resolve the issue :) See https://crates.io/crates/time/versions, and modify Cargo.toml:

-time = { version = "0.3.37", features = ["macros"] }
+time = { version = "=0.3.45", features = ["macros"] }

Hopefully no more package versions are problematic.

Thanks.

[davelil4]

@afiffon Looks like the lockfile removal in the build step leaves us with some crates that are not compatible with rustc 1.85. Is there a reason the lockfile is being removed? I'm confused by the comment in the workflow, but this can't merge unless we set the crate version or keep the lockfile.

[davelil4]

@afiffon Can you please approve the workflow when you get the chance.