On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 06:41:29PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> * misono.tomoh...@fujitsu.com (misono.tomoh...@fujitsu.com) wrote:
> > > Right now we enable remote posix locks by default. That means when guest
> > > does a posix lock it sends request to server
> > > (virtiofsd). But curr
On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 08:20:39AM +, misono.tomoh...@fujitsu.com wrote:
> > Right now we enable remote posix locks by default. That means when guest
> > does a posix lock it sends request to server
> > (virtiofsd). But currently we only support non-blocking posix lock and
> > return -EOPNOTS
* misono.tomoh...@fujitsu.com (misono.tomoh...@fujitsu.com) wrote:
> > Right now we enable remote posix locks by default. That means when guest
> > does a posix lock it sends request to server
> > (virtiofsd). But currently we only support non-blocking posix lock and
> > return -EOPNOTSUPP for bl
> Right now we enable remote posix locks by default. That means when guest does
> a posix lock it sends request to server
> (virtiofsd). But currently we only support non-blocking posix lock and return
> -EOPNOTSUPP for blocking version.
>
> This means that existing applications which are doing
On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 12:18:41PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> Right now we enable remote posix locks by default. That means when guest
> does a posix lock it sends request to server (virtiofsd). But currently
> we only support non-blocking posix lock and return -EOPNOTSUPP for
> blocking version.
