linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Add O_DENY* support for VFS and CIFS/NFS

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

Message-Id: <20130118095538.fdd0b3be90739b9fd9179b5d@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:	Fri, 18 Jan 2013 09:55:38 +1100
From:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:	Pavel Shilovsky <piastry@...rsoft.ru>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
	wine-devel@...ehq.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Add O_DENY* support for VFS and CIFS/NFS

Hi Pavel,

On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 20:52:09 +0400 Pavel Shilovsky <piastry@...rsoft.ru> wrote:
>
> This patchset adds support of O_DENY* flags for Linux fs layer. These flags can be used by any application that needs share reservations to organize a file access. VFS already has some sort of this capability - now it's done through flock/LOCK_MAND mechanis, but that approach is non-atomic. This patchset build new capabilities on top of the existing one but doesn't bring any changes into the flock call semantic.

This has probably been discussed, but is Linux's leases implementation
not sufficient?  Just wondering.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@...b.auug.org.au

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped