From: stsp <stsp2@yandex.ru>
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] fd/locks: allow get the lock owner by F_OFD_GETLK
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2023 16:26:14 +0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f6fea0d2-2def-8f6b-9c53-f1199ebf95f6@yandex.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2d9f894c-39aa-ec45-78f7-a11ac980bb62@yandex.ru>
21.06.2023 16:22, stsp пишет:
>
> 21.06.2023 16:05, Jeff Layton пишет:
>> Yes. Ambiguous answers are worse than none at all.
>
> But same for read locks, when you
> query them with F_OFD_GETLK.
> It doesn't sound ambiguous to me,
> you get the valid owner, and you can
> iterate them if you kill them in a
> process (same as for read locks).
And in fact, no, you can't iterate the
read locks *unless* you use pid to
kill its owners! :) So this way you can
actually iterate the read locks, but
not in a most convenient way. :)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-21 11:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-20 9:55 [PATCH 0/3] RFC: F_OFD_GETLK should provide more info Stas Sergeev
2023-06-20 9:55 ` [PATCH 1/3] fs/locks: F_UNLCK extension for F_OFD_GETLK Stas Sergeev
2023-06-20 10:46 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-20 11:00 ` stsp
2023-06-20 11:15 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-21 15:24 ` stsp
2023-06-20 9:55 ` [PATCH 2/3] fd/locks: allow get the lock owner by F_OFD_GETLK Stas Sergeev
2023-06-20 10:51 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-20 10:57 ` stsp
2023-06-20 11:12 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-20 11:45 ` stsp
2023-06-20 12:02 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-20 12:34 ` stsp
2023-06-20 13:19 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-20 13:39 ` stsp
2023-06-20 13:46 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-06-20 13:47 ` stsp
2023-06-20 14:36 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-06-20 15:45 ` stsp
2023-06-20 17:05 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-06-21 2:54 ` stsp
2023-06-23 13:10 ` David Laight
2023-06-20 13:58 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-21 6:57 ` stsp
2023-06-21 10:35 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-21 10:42 ` stsp
2023-06-21 11:05 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-21 11:22 ` stsp
2023-06-21 11:26 ` stsp [this message]
2023-06-23 15:25 ` Christian Brauner
2023-06-23 17:18 ` stsp
2023-06-27 16:00 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-27 16:20 ` stsp
2023-06-20 9:55 ` [PATCH 3/3] selftests: add OFD lock tests Stas Sergeev
2023-06-20 11:06 ` Jeff Layton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=f6fea0d2-2def-8f6b-9c53-f1199ebf95f6@yandex.ru \
--to=stsp2@yandex.ru \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).