linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 13/14] locks: skip deadlock detection on FL_FILE

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 14 Jan 2014 13:24:43 -0800
From:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To:	Richard Hipp <drh@...ite.org>
Cc:	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>,
	Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	nfs-ganesha-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	samba-technical@...ts.samba.org,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Richard Hipp <drh@...ci.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 13/14] locks: skip deadlock detection on FL_FILE_PVT locks

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 1:21 PM, Richard Hipp <drh@...ite.org> wrote:
> I have no context here.  I'm not sure what you are discussing or what
> questions you have or what SQLite has to do with any of it.  Nevertheless, I
> have injected a few remarks inline....
>

The discussion is about a new set of fcntl locking commands that are
are respect locks acquired with the old ones but suck less.  This
seems like the right time to discuss what would make them even better.
 The immediate change is to let them be owned by the fd instead of the
process.

This might end up in POSIX and could make sqlite (and lots of other
things') lives easier.

--Andy
--
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/