From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750961AbWBUX0U (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2006 18:26:20 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751091AbWBUX0U (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2006 18:26:20 -0500 Received: from mail.fieldses.org ([66.93.2.214]:39898 "EHLO pickle.fieldses.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750961AbWBUX0U (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2006 18:26:20 -0500 Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 18:26:07 -0500 To: Trond Myklebust Cc: Andrew Morton , Oleg Drokin , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: FMODE_EXEC or alike? Message-ID: <20060221232607.GS22042@fieldses.org> References: <20060220221948.GC5733@linuxhacker.ru> <20060220215122.7aa8bbe5.akpm@osdl.org> <1140530396.7864.63.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1140530396.7864.63.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060126 From: "J. Bruce Fields" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 08:59:56AM -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote: > 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. So on the NFS client, an open with FMODE_EXEC could be translated into an NFSv4 open with a deny_write bit (since NFSv4 opens also do windows share locks). An NFSv4 server might also be able to translate deny mode writes into FMODE_EXEC in the case where it was exporting a cluster filesystem. It wouldn't completely solve the problem of implementing cluster-coherent share locks (which also let you deny reads, who knows why), but it seems like it would address the case most likely to matter. --b.