lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Dec]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] cdrom weirdness
On Thu, Dec 04 2008, Al Viro wrote:
> 1) CDROM_LOCKDOOR sets a global variable (keeplocked) that affects all
> cdroms. Intentional?

It's always been so, predates me. Pretty ugly, I don't think anyone
would mind if that was changed to be per-device when the ioctl is ussed
:-)

> 2) cdrom_dvd_rw_close_write() call can be delayed indefinitely by keeping
> an ioctl-only (opened with O_NDELAY) descriptor.

Yep, not sure what you want me to say here...

> 3) open cdrom for data, have the door locked, keep fd opened.
> open it again for write, have the open fail and cleanup in cdrom_open()
> will happily unlock the door for you. I'd change that to "lock if we
> had no lockers, unlock on failure exit if we did lock", but there's
> an interesting comment:
> /* Something failed. Try to unlock the drive, because some drivers
> (notably ide-cd) lock the drive after every command.
> ...
> What the hell is that about? It's not "some drivers", AFAICT - it's
> been done explicitly in open_for_data(). Or is there something
> really driver-specific in it?
>
> 4) while we are at it, if you clear lockdoor via sysctl while something has
> cdrom opened - no unlock on close for you.
>
> 5) autoeject happens on the last close *IF* the last file happens to be
> opened for data. IOW, if some crap has opened it ioctl-only and kept
> that opened after everyone else has closed - no autoeject for you.

Most of the above are long known issues with not counting
write/non-write/ioctls opens, since it was tricky/impossible to do
because of fcntl().

> 6) /*
> * flush cache on last write release
> */
> if (CDROM_CAN(CDC_RAM) && !cdi->use_count && cdi->for_data)
> cdrom_close_write(cdi);
> is interesting, seeing that nothing has ever touched ->for_data, for
> values of "ever" including "since the code in question had been merged
> into the tree"...

Hmm weird, you are right. The member was added in 2.6.2, but never used
except here. I guess this just needs to use opened_for_data.

--
Jens Axboe



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-12-04 14:11    [W:0.352 / U:0.072 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site