From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF49EC433E0 for ; Sun, 7 Feb 2021 04:27:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CDA7564E8C for ; Sun, 7 Feb 2021 04:27:03 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org CDA7564E8C Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=bugs.launchpad.net Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:40770 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l8bf4-0002u4-PO for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Sat, 06 Feb 2021 23:27:02 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41822) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l8bdu-0002M1-0Y for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 06 Feb 2021 23:25:50 -0500 Received: from indium.canonical.com ([91.189.90.7]:59248) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l8bdq-0008Vm-NG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 06 Feb 2021 23:25:49 -0500 Received: from loganberry.canonical.com ([91.189.90.37]) by indium.canonical.com with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2 #2 (Debian)) id 1l8bdn-0002Ar-KO for ; Sun, 07 Feb 2021 04:25:43 +0000 Received: from loganberry.canonical.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by loganberry.canonical.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80DC52E80E1 for ; Sun, 7 Feb 2021 04:25:43 +0000 (UTC) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sun, 07 Feb 2021 04:17:21 -0000 From: Launchpad Bug Tracker <1905979@bugs.launchpad.net> To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Launchpad-Notification-Type: bug X-Launchpad-Bug: product=qemu; status=Expired; importance=Undecided; assignee=None; X-Launchpad-Bug-Information-Type: Public X-Launchpad-Bug-Private: no X-Launchpad-Bug-Security-Vulnerability: no X-Launchpad-Bug-Commenters: berrange janitor oseibert-sys11 X-Launchpad-Bug-Reporter: Olaf Seibert (oseibert-sys11) X-Launchpad-Bug-Modifier: Launchpad Janitor (janitor) References: <160648885405.8173.13759191424779303608.malonedeb@soybean.canonical.com> Message-Id: <161267144121.32486.6884059180343617140.malone@loganberry.canonical.com> Subject: [Bug 1905979] Re: Check if F_OFD_SETLK is supported may give wrong result X-Launchpad-Message-Rationale: Subscriber (QEMU) @qemu-devel-ml X-Launchpad-Message-For: qemu-devel-ml Precedence: bulk X-Generated-By: Launchpad (canonical.com); Revision="3d7abcb776ec05aa0a89112accc21bf8b41dfc24"; Instance="production" X-Launchpad-Hash: 0296dfcf07fdaebad7e0d22dd96dab204a12b570 Received-SPF: none client-ip=91.189.90.7; envelope-from=bounces@canonical.com; helo=indium.canonical.com X-Spam_score_int: -65 X-Spam_score: -6.6 X-Spam_bar: ------ X-Spam_report: (-6.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Bug 1905979 <1905979@bugs.launchpad.net> Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" [Expired for QEMU because there has been no activity for 60 days.] ** Changed in: qemu Status: Incomplete =3D> Expired -- = You received this bug notification because you are a member of qemu- devel-ml, which is subscribed to QEMU. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1905979 Title: Check if F_OFD_SETLK is supported may give wrong result Status in QEMU: Expired Bug description: In util/osdep.c there is a function qemu_probe_lock_ops() to check if file locks F_OFD_SETLK and F_OFD_GETLK (of the style "Open file description locks (non-POSIX)") are supported. This test is done by trying a lock operation on the file /dev/null. This test can get a wrong result. The result is (probably) if the operating system *in general* supports these locks. However, it does not guarantee that the file system where the lock is really wanted (for instance, in caller raw_check_lock_bytes() in block/file-posix.c) does support these locks. (In theory it could even be that /dev/null, being a device special file, does not support the lock type while a plain file would.) This is in particular relevant for disk images which are stored on a shared file system (my particular use case is the Quobyte file system, which appears not to support these locks). The code as mentioned above is present in the master branch (I checked commit ea8208249d1082eae0444934efb3b59cd3183f05) but also for example on stable-2.11 commit 0982a56a551556c704dc15752dabf57b4be1c640) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1905979/+subscriptions