lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Feb]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-02-22 10:59    [W:0.084 / U:1.048 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site