On Jan 18 13:11, Ben wrote:
>
>
> On 18-01-2021 11:45, Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin-patches wrote:
> > Rather than calling NtSetInformationFile here again, we should rather
> > just skip the transaction stuff on 1809 and later. I'd suggest adding
> > another wincap flag like, say, "has_posix_ro_override", being true
> > for 1809 and later. Then we can skip the transaction handling if
> > wincap.has_posix_ro_override () and just add the
> > FILE_DISPOSITION_IGNORE_READONLY_ATTRIBUTE flag to fdie.Flags, if
> > it's available.
>
> Hmmm, I'm not sure if I follow you: This extra NtSetInformationFile is not
> related to the transaction stuff?
Right, sorry. I meant the
if (pc.file_attributes () & FILE_ATTRIBUTE_READONLY)
bracketed code in fact. What I meant is to keep it at
open
if (ro)
setattributes
setinformation
...
and only add the required additional flag.
> Also I have seen NtSetInformationFile fail with STATUS_INVALID_PARAMETER.
That should only occur on pre-1809 then, and adding the extra wincap
would fix that.
> So a retry without FILE_DISPOSITION_IGNORE_READONLY_ATTRIBUTE is valid here.
That would be a border case which might then occur with the
FILE_DISPOSITION_POSIX_SEMANTICS flag, too. The current code falls
through anyway, that should be sufficient, right?
>
> I have thought about adding
> wincap.has_posix_unlink_semantics_with_ignore_readonly
> but it is equal to wincap.has_posix_rename_semantics so I didn't bother
> adding it.
It doesn't hurt to add another flag with the same values. It's better
readable in context, which easily makes up for the extra bit :)
Corinna
