[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5728ebda22a723b0eb209ae078e8f132d7b4ac7b.camel@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 06:51:41 -0400
From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
To: Stas Sergeev <stsp2@...dex.ru>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] fd/locks: allow get the lock owner by F_OFD_GETLK
On Tue, 2023-06-20 at 14:55 +0500, Stas Sergeev wrote:
> Currently F_OFD_GETLK sets the pid of the lock owner to -1.
> Remove such behavior to allow getting the proper owner's pid.
> This may be helpful when you want to send some message (like SIGKILL)
> to the offending locker.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stas Sergeev <stsp2@...dex.ru>
>
> CC: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
> CC: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>
> CC: Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
> CC: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
> CC: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
> CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
>
> ---
> fs/locks.c | 2 --
> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
> index 210766007e63..ee265e166542 100644
> --- a/fs/locks.c
> +++ b/fs/locks.c
> @@ -2158,8 +2158,6 @@ static pid_t locks_translate_pid(struct file_lock *fl, struct pid_namespace *ns)
> pid_t vnr;
> struct pid *pid;
>
> - if (IS_OFDLCK(fl))
> - return -1;
> if (IS_REMOTELCK(fl))
> return fl->fl_pid;
> /*
NACK on this one.
OFD locks are not owned by processes. They are owned by the file
description (hence the name). Because of this, returning a pid here is
wrong.
This precedent comes from BSD, where flock() and POSIX locks can
conflict. BSD returns -1 for the pid if you call F_GETLK on a file
locked with flock(). Since OFD locks have similar ownership semantics to
flock() locks, we use the same convention here.
Cheers,
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists