kernel support for open share modes
J. Bruce Fields
bfields at fieldses.org
Mon Feb 14 20:17:37 GMT 2005
On Wed, Feb 09, 2005 at 05:01:46PM -0500, bfields wrote:
> OK, that's very interesting, I hadn't noticed the LOCK_MAND, LOCK_READ,
> and LOCK_WRITE constants before.
> One problem is that NFSv4 at least seems to require the setting of deny
> modes to be atomic with open()--so it would be incorrect if, for
> example, we created a file but allowed someone else to beat us to the
> flock(). From a quick look at the use of kernel_flock() it looks like
> this is also a requirement for Samba, and (am I understanding this
> right?) this race is avoided only on the assumption that smbd is the
> *only* user of LOCK_MAND?
Hm. Another problem that was pointed out to me: an open without deny
bits, which doesn't result in any flock(), doesn't actually prevent
later conflicting opens with deny locks.
Are there ideas for how to fix all this?
More information about the samba-technical