[PATCH v3 6/6] locks: add new "private" lock type that is owned by the filp

[David Collier-Brown]

On 12/17/2013 08:50 AM, Jeff Layton wrote:
> If we use new cmd values however, then we don't necessarily need to
> use struct flock/flock64. I think the question is -- should we stick
> with struct flock/flock64, or would we be better served with something
> new for this? Thanks, 

If the structure works for all architectures as-is, then it's probably
best to minimize change.  If there is a need for a change, we might want
to look into an extended construct, which I might (frivolously?) call
flock128.

--dave

-- 
David Collier-Brown,         | Always do right. This will gratify
System Programmer and Author | some people and astonish the rest
davecb at spamcop.net           |                      -- Mark Twain
(416) 223-8968