lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Feb]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 3/8] vfs: Add O_DENYREAD/WRITE flags support for open syscall
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 06:32:38PM +0400, Pavel Shilovsky wrote:
> 2013/2/7 J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>:
> > On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 01:53:46PM +0400, Pavel Shilovsky wrote:
> >> Nothing prevents it. If somebody grabbed a share mode lock on a file
> >> before we call deny_lock_file, we simply close this file and return
> >> -ETXTBSY.
> >
> > But leave the newly-created file there--ugh.
> >
> >> We can't grab it before atomic_open because we don't have an
> >> inode there.
> >
> > If you can get the lock while still holding the directory i_mutex can't
> > you prevent anyone else from looking up the new file until you've gotten
> > the lock?
> >
>
> Hm..., seems you are right, I missed this part:
> mutex_lock
> lookup_open -> atomic_open -> deny_lock_file
> mutex_unlock
>
> that means that nobody can open and of course set flock on the newly
> created file (because flock is done through file descriptor). So, it
> should be fine to call flock after f_ops->atomic_open in atomic_open
> function. Thanks.

Whether that works may also depend on how the new dentry is set up? If
it's hashed before you call flock then I suppose it's already visible to
others.

Not knowing that code as well as I should, I might test by introducing
an artificial delay there and trying to reproduce the race.

--b.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-02-07 16:43    [W:0.048 / U:0.624 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site