Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 22 Feb 2006 10:57:24 +0100 | From | "Antonio Vargas" <> | Subject | Re: FMODE_EXEC or alike? |
| |
On 2/21/06, Oleg Drokin <green@linuxhacker.ru> wrote: > Hello! > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 03:15:53PM +0100, Antonio Vargas wrote: > > > > We would need to understand whether this is needed by other distributed > > > > filesystems and if so, whether the proposed implementation is suitable and > > > > sufficient. > > > Hmm.... We might possibly want to use that for NFSv4 at some point in > > > order to deny write access to the file to other clients while it is in > > > use. > > When done with regards to failing a write if anyone has mapped the > > file for executing it, or failing the execute if it's open/mmaped for > > write, I can't really see the difference between local, remote and > > clustered filesystems... > > Currently this is only possible locally, when both execution and opening > for writing is performed on the same node. Then VFS enforces ETXTBSY. > But if you do exec on one node and open for writing on another, > VFSes on those nodes have no idea on what happens on all other nodes. >
Thanks for the enlightement Oleg, I had assumed the owner of the file to write over the executable while it's being executed... sort of self-modifying code, but s/self/external/ ;)
Greetz, Antonio Vargas aka winden of network - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |