linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] AFS: Implement file locking

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 29 May 2007 16:08:13 -0400
From:	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
To:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:	akpm@...l.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] AFS: Implement file locking

On Tue, May 29, 2007 at 10:34:41AM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> I'll need to test the upgrade/downgrade case.  I don't know whether the AFS
> server supports that.  If it doesn't, I can emulate downgrade, but not upgrade
> - not unless I only ever ask it for exclusive locks.
> 
> Lock upgrading is really, really easy to contrive deadlock for.

Any such deadlock is the user's fault.

But, right, I agree that upgrades are probably hard to use correctly.
And that implementing them shouldn't be a priority in the case of AFS.
Just as long as the implementation doesn't completely fall over when
somebody attempts an upgrade.

--b.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/