[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKywueTOi-WPpgH7x3VK7EkGJXE8fHUqcLgSUm6o6UA+uaQtjA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 13:56:26 +0400
From: Pavel Shilovsky <piastry@...rsoft.ru>
To: Frank Filz <ffilzlnx@...dspring.com>
Cc: Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-cifs <linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux NFS Mailing list <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
wine-devel@...ehq.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/7] Add O_DENY* support for VFS and CIFS/NFS
2014/1/17 Frank Filz <ffilzlnx@...dspring.com>:
> This looks wonderful and will be useful to the Ganesha user space NFS server
> also.
>
> I do have a couple questions.
>
> 1. How will this interact with the idea of private locks from the patch set
> Jeff Layton has been pushing?
They don't touch each other.
>
> 2. If a process opens multiple file descriptors with deny modes, will they
> conflict with each other (which is the behavior we will want for Ganesha).
Yes, a deny mode is associated with file descriptor - so, it will
conflict with any other access/deny modes of file descriptors from any
process.
>
> 3. Is there any functionality to upgrade or downgrade the access and deny
> modes (thinking in terms of NFS v4 support of OPEN upgrade and
> OPEN_DOWNGRADE operations).
The proposed patchset doesn't allow to change deny modes after an open
is done. But we can add a functionality to let flock syscall change
deny modes as on option.
--
Best regards,
Pavel Shilovsky.
--
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