2014-01-17 Pavel Shilovsky :
> 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,
> 2014/1/17 Frank Filz :
> > 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
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 05:31:39PM +0400, Pavel Shilovsky wrote:
> It's not possible with the current API to do it through open syscall.
> Another possibility is to look at /proc/locks. But I think we really
> need O_DELETE flag that will force a file to be removed on close - we
> will be able to d
2014/1/20 Volker Lendecke :
>> You can try to use O_PATH flag. It doesn't give you a delete access
>> but should be ok because further deleting will be done without file
>> descriptor -- through unlink syscall.
>
> Ok, I did not know about O_PATH. Thanks for that!
>
> So I do an open with O_PATH. H
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 02:20:43PM +0400, Pavel Shilovsky wrote:
> > One question: If Samba wants to open a file for delete
> > access, there's no corresponding flag in the open
> > permissions. There can be the case where Samba wants to open
> > *just* for future unlink, no read or write access re
2014/1/20 Volker Lendecke :
> Hi!
>
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 02:07:05PM +0400, Pavel Shilovsky wrote:
>> If O_DENYDELETE flag is specified and the open succeded,
>> any further unlink operation will fail with -ESHAREDENIED
>> untill this open is closed. Now this flag is processed by
>> VFS and CIF
2014/1/17 Frank Filz :
> 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
Hi!
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 02:07:05PM +0400, Pavel Shilovsky wrote:
> If O_DENYDELETE flag is specified and the open succeded,
> any further unlink operation will fail with -ESHAREDENIED
> untill this open is closed. Now this flag is processed by
> VFS and CIFS filesystem. NFS returns -EINVAL for
wine-de...@winehq.org
> Subject: [PATCH v7 0/7] Add O_DENY* support for VFS and CIFS/NFS
>
> 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 sor
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
Main changes from v6:
1) Fix LOCK_DELETE mandatory lock detection for O_DENYDELETE opens.
2) Add ESHAREDENIED error code definition for alpha, mips, parisc and sparc
arches.
3) Remove code changes in do_last function if sharelocks are disabled.
Main changes from v5:
1) O_DENYDELETE is now support
11 matches
Mail list logo
