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=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, 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 A95AAC433DB for ; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 18:06:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E1DF64F39 for ; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 18:06:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229787AbhCOSGM (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Mar 2021 14:06:12 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42260 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232797AbhCOSGE (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Mar 2021 14:06:04 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-x532.google.com (mail-ed1-x532.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::532]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 22658C06174A; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 11:06:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x532.google.com with SMTP id bx7so18425802edb.12; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 11:06:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=dtKlKHFRajPvI7CSMUOEG4ze6C8H0xz+Hxml/vouBM0=; b=NshHy0liKI2h07+tos8pGxEzNZ3I684y+UdGmC8CNKz0cG1wSGBvVsbpGtCVUscnuM NABJbNYx99oPZiRvcjFPtN0JXQthg5ribz0zRKoXjesSlDFSWsov2AYwSee3wd0Gk8eI ZEqRKwI9uiR+VLyWUl+4a7KS77ahiEtlhTF29n3QMw/jM4gf9CUtuNabUszBz+JyTnbN AnAhDO9P1ObiYO8OsjlY1h8jUi9iEUcGbpdhhDxPEhPhFlT3RbcqZUS5S3CDU2jcUaP4 Kxp4xODeLAza4Ye7+qaI/0lBvudju0ARq2zt/l+Tni2OVZnkMJfNHHWqSMluPiGnVrhh +cZg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=dtKlKHFRajPvI7CSMUOEG4ze6C8H0xz+Hxml/vouBM0=; b=cndgwcflTRmx03fEo5E6l+StQPTI/GbzNaR+U94kv388uqYxokCiafbFXVbDjgBBpW M5hsMoy4EqYdPYSRgZqcDlyUoDirMU/ICJ1NOS8T6dQcQboGnbBi/4NNz8yEOEdV9f9V QHLNTsackfa9mMVEHyO9QQ7fpqWQTy8jFUgGseZAPhuuMZmIklcW89LFlJ6eSpv0qkyn ZchNxfXGECdRouaHrAoybZ+GxlJgeEe/nwikqn0Zhn168EqStBzhQl0mv9Wjr2Z3/5xn 3hV2MYXF5uwWhn464ZOz7s9jCMmpis2m1wQ1Qtge5/38ylVNV3b5qZO0AeII8B0K60pk NuwQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5300gvfPJO7WZHzjvWriHKFu9AboiMMgOBjOMdGuvsCWh7ogoF2t KpB4L4wLl9/R6XEQO19VCp3j78jwAGCGLjrWRFw1zVw/Mg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzBy+4gMbICPjfDzgy0t8kR3JjU4gv+tunKC6UAZ22iY4j8lQZokca/okQu4FhiOjdMXOyGELlf+UUQCuzfqc0= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:3089:: with SMTP id de9mr31845095edb.10.1615831562875; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 11:06:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <87v9a7w8q7.fsf@suse.com> <20210304095026.782-1-aaptel@suse.com> <45b64990-b879-02d3-28e5-b896af0502c4@gmail.com> <87sg52t2xj.fsf@suse.com> <139a3729-9460-7272-b1d7-c2feb5679ee9@talpey.com> <87eegltxzd.fsf@suse.com> <878s6ttwhd.fsf@suse.com> <23052c07-8050-4eb8-d2de-506c60dbed7d@talpey.com> <871rcltiw9.fsf@suse.com> In-Reply-To: <871rcltiw9.fsf@suse.com> From: Pavel Shilovsky Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 11:05:51 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] flock.2: add CIFS details To: =?UTF-8?Q?Aur=C3=A9lien_Aptel?= Cc: Tom Talpey , "Alejandro Colomar (man-pages)" , Steve French , linux-cifs , linux-fsdevel , mtk.manpages@gmail.com, linux-man@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org =D1=87=D1=82, 11 =D0=BC=D0=B0=D1=80. 2021 =D0=B3. =D0=B2 14:41, Aur=C3=A9li= en Aptel : Hi Aurelien, > > Ok, then I agree with your last paragraph. Here's the current version, wi= th semantic newlines: > > In Linux kernels up to 5.4, flock() is not propagated over SMB. > A file with such locks will not appear locked for remote clients. > > Since Linux 5.5, flock() locks are emulated with SMB byte-range locks on= the entire file. > Similarly to NFS, this means that fcntl(2) and flock() locks interact wi= th one another. > Another important side-effect is that the locks are not advisory anymore= : > a write on a locked file will always fail with EACCES. It is not only about writing to a locked file. It is also about any IO against a locked file if such a file is locked through another file handle. Right? -- Best regards, Pavel Shilovsky