[PATCH] s4: smbtorture - Add additional test that shows our current locking precedence is correct.

Jeremy Allison jra at samba.org
Mon Jul 7 12:48:02 MDT 2014

Hi all,

Volker and I had an interesting conversation over
the weekend after which I realized we didn't know
what the Windows algorithm for lock precedence on
SMB1 multi-lock calls really was.

So here is a test that shows we currently have it
correct - tested against Win2K12 (wonder if I ever
checked this in the past, in the pre-test-driven
development days :-).

Anyway, this at least will prevent us from regressing.

For those interested :-).

This test is designed to show that
lock precedence on the server is based
on the order received, not on the ability
to grant. For example:

A blocked lock request containing 2 locks
will be satified before a subsequent blocked
lock request over one of the same regions,
even if that region is then unlocked. E.g.

(a) lock 100->109, 120->129 (granted)
(b) lock 100->109, 120-129 (blocks)
(c) lock 100->109          (blocks)
(d) unlock 100->109

lock (c) will not be granted as lock (b)
will take precedence.

Please review & push if appropriate !


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0001-s4-torture-Add-a-new-lock-test-to-show-that-the-Samb.patch
Type: text/x-diff
Size: 5965 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba-technical/attachments/20140707/f62b813d/attachment.patch>

More information about the samba-technical mailing list