[lkml]   [2005]   [May]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: fcntl: F_SETLEASE/F_RDLCK question
On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 04:53:50PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
> I applied this against 2.6.12-rc4, and it fixes the problem
> (and I've also teasted various other facets of file leases
> and this change causes no obvious breakage elsewhere).
> Are you going to push this fix into 2.6.12?

Are you sure this is actually a problem?

I still have the following questions I had before:

> I'm a little confused as to why anyone would have the expectation
> that read leases would not conflict with write opens by the same
> process, given that break_lease() has never functioned that way, so
> later write opens by the same process have always broken any read lease.
> Are there applications that actually depend on the old behaviour? Is
> there any documentation that blesses it? All I can find is the fcntl
> man page, and as far as I can tell an implementation that makes read
> leases conflict with all write opens (by the same process or not) is
> consistent with that man page.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-05-31 17:27    [W:0.080 / U:21.576 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site