[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081008051630.GQ25780@parisc-linux.org>
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 23:16:31 -0600
From: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
To: Hisashi Hifumi <hifumi.hisashi@....ntt.co.jp>
Cc: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Subject: Re: [RESEND] [PATCH] VFS: make file->f_pos access atomic on 32bit arch
On Wed, Oct 08, 2008 at 01:48:10PM +0900, Hisashi Hifumi wrote:
> Simultaneous access by two or more writer can corrupt file content,
> so this case needs some locks(flock or fcntl) to preserve synchronization
> of file content. This is responsibility of user-space application.
> But file->f_pos race issue can occur even if multiple threads just read
> simultaneously. I think this is not responsibility of user-space application.
> To avoid this currently, an application needs some locks to protect file offset
> even if it just read a file. So I think f_pos race should be fixed.
Why is this application not using pread() / pwrite() to use thread-local
file pointers?
--
Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre
"Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this
operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such
a retrograde step."
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists