2014-01-09 14:23:38

by Jeff Layton

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH RFC] fcntl.2: update manpage with verbiage about file-private locks

Please don't merge this yet, as the kernel patches are still a work in
progress...

Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
---
man2/fcntl.2 | 97 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 94 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/man2/fcntl.2 b/man2/fcntl.2
index 72dcd7b..74c67b6 100644
--- a/man2/fcntl.2
+++ b/man2/fcntl.2
@@ -208,7 +208,7 @@ struct flock {
off_t l_start; /* Starting offset for lock */
off_t l_len; /* Number of bytes to lock */
pid_t l_pid; /* PID of process blocking our lock
- (F_GETLK only) */
+ (F_GETLK and F_GETLKP only) */
...
};
.fi
@@ -344,9 +344,13 @@ returns details about one of these locks in the
.IR l_type ", " l_whence ", " l_start ", and " l_len
fields of
.I lock
-and sets
+.
+If the conflicting lock is a traditional POSIX lock, then the
.I l_pid
-to be the PID of the process holding that lock.
+will be set to the PID of the process holding that lock. If the
+conflicting lock is a file-private lock, then the
+.I l_pid
+will be set to -1.
.P
In order to place a read lock,
.I fd
@@ -386,6 +390,93 @@ should be avoided; use
and
.BR write (2)
instead.
+.SS File-private locking
+(Currently non-POSIX, but being proposed)
+.PP
+.BR F_GETLKP ", " F_SETLKP " and " F_SETLKPW
+are used to acquire, release and test file-private record locks. These
+are byte-range locks that work identically to the traditional advisory
+record locks described above, but are associated with the open file on
+which they were acquired rather than the process, much like locks
+acquired with
+.BR flock (2)
+.
+.PP
+Unlike traditional advisory record locks, these locks are inherited
+across
+.BR fork (2) ", " dup (2) " and " dup2 (2)
+and are only released on the last close of the open file instead of being
+released on any close of the file.
+.PP
+File-private locks always conflict with traditional record locks, even
+when they are acquired by the same process on the same file descriptor.
+They only conflict with each other when they are acquired on different
+open file descriptors.
+.TP
+.BR F_SETLKP " (\fIstruct flock *\fP)"
+Acquire a lock (when
+.I l_type
+is
+.B F_RDLCK
+or
+.BR F_WRLCK )
+or release a lock (when
+.I l_type
+is
+.BR F_UNLCK )
+on the bytes specified by the
+.IR l_whence ", " l_start ", and " l_len
+fields of
+.IR lock .
+If a conflicting lock is held by another process,
+this call returns \-1 and sets
+.I errno
+to
+.B EACCES
+or
+.BR EAGAIN .
+.TP
+.BR F_SETLKPW " (\fIstruct flock *\fP)"
+As for
+.BR F_SETLKP ,
+but if a conflicting lock is held on the file, then wait for that
+lock to be released.
+If a signal is caught while waiting, then the call is interrupted
+and (after the signal handler has returned)
+returns immediately (with return value \-1 and
+.I errno
+set to
+.BR EINTR ;
+see
+.BR signal (7)).
+.TP
+.BR F_GETLKP " (\fIstruct flock *\fP)"
+On input to this call,
+.I lock
+describes a lock we would like to place on the file.
+If the lock could be placed,
+.BR fcntl ()
+does not actually place it, but returns
+.B F_UNLCK
+in the
+.I l_type
+field of
+.I lock
+and leaves the other fields of the structure unchanged.
+If one or more incompatible locks would prevent
+this lock being placed, then
+.BR fcntl ()
+returns details about one of these locks in the
+.IR l_type ", " l_whence ", " l_start ", and " l_len
+fields of
+.I lock
+.
+If the conflicting lock is a traditional POSIX lock, then the
+.I l_pid
+will be set to the PID of the process holding that lock. If the
+conflicting lock is a file-private lock, then the
+.I l_pid
+will be set to -1.
.SS Mandatory locking
(Non-POSIX.)
The above record locks may be either advisory or mandatory,
--
1.8.4.2


Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] fcntl.2: update manpage with verbiage about file-private locks

Hello Jeff,

On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 3:23 PM, Jeff Layton <[email protected]> wrote:
> Please don't merge this yet, as the kernel patches are still a work in
> progress...

Now that this has hit mainline, is this man page patch still current?

Cheers,

Michael

> Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
> ---
> man2/fcntl.2 | 97 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 94 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/man2/fcntl.2 b/man2/fcntl.2
> index 72dcd7b..74c67b6 100644
> --- a/man2/fcntl.2
> +++ b/man2/fcntl.2
> @@ -208,7 +208,7 @@ struct flock {
> off_t l_start; /* Starting offset for lock */
> off_t l_len; /* Number of bytes to lock */
> pid_t l_pid; /* PID of process blocking our lock
> - (F_GETLK only) */
> + (F_GETLK and F_GETLKP only) */
> ...
> };
> .fi
> @@ -344,9 +344,13 @@ returns details about one of these locks in the
> .IR l_type ", " l_whence ", " l_start ", and " l_len
> fields of
> .I lock
> -and sets
> +.
> +If the conflicting lock is a traditional POSIX lock, then the
> .I l_pid
> -to be the PID of the process holding that lock.
> +will be set to the PID of the process holding that lock. If the
> +conflicting lock is a file-private lock, then the
> +.I l_pid
> +will be set to -1.
> .P
> In order to place a read lock,
> .I fd
> @@ -386,6 +390,93 @@ should be avoided; use
> and
> .BR write (2)
> instead.
> +.SS File-private locking
> +(Currently non-POSIX, but being proposed)
> +.PP
> +.BR F_GETLKP ", " F_SETLKP " and " F_SETLKPW
> +are used to acquire, release and test file-private record locks. These
> +are byte-range locks that work identically to the traditional advisory
> +record locks described above, but are associated with the open file on
> +which they were acquired rather than the process, much like locks
> +acquired with
> +.BR flock (2)
> +.
> +.PP
> +Unlike traditional advisory record locks, these locks are inherited
> +across
> +.BR fork (2) ", " dup (2) " and " dup2 (2)
> +and are only released on the last close of the open file instead of being
> +released on any close of the file.
> +.PP
> +File-private locks always conflict with traditional record locks, even
> +when they are acquired by the same process on the same file descriptor.
> +They only conflict with each other when they are acquired on different
> +open file descriptors.
> +.TP
> +.BR F_SETLKP " (\fIstruct flock *\fP)"
> +Acquire a lock (when
> +.I l_type
> +is
> +.B F_RDLCK
> +or
> +.BR F_WRLCK )
> +or release a lock (when
> +.I l_type
> +is
> +.BR F_UNLCK )
> +on the bytes specified by the
> +.IR l_whence ", " l_start ", and " l_len
> +fields of
> +.IR lock .
> +If a conflicting lock is held by another process,
> +this call returns \-1 and sets
> +.I errno
> +to
> +.B EACCES
> +or
> +.BR EAGAIN .
> +.TP
> +.BR F_SETLKPW " (\fIstruct flock *\fP)"
> +As for
> +.BR F_SETLKP ,
> +but if a conflicting lock is held on the file, then wait for that
> +lock to be released.
> +If a signal is caught while waiting, then the call is interrupted
> +and (after the signal handler has returned)
> +returns immediately (with return value \-1 and
> +.I errno
> +set to
> +.BR EINTR ;
> +see
> +.BR signal (7)).
> +.TP
> +.BR F_GETLKP " (\fIstruct flock *\fP)"
> +On input to this call,
> +.I lock
> +describes a lock we would like to place on the file.
> +If the lock could be placed,
> +.BR fcntl ()
> +does not actually place it, but returns
> +.B F_UNLCK
> +in the
> +.I l_type
> +field of
> +.I lock
> +and leaves the other fields of the structure unchanged.
> +If one or more incompatible locks would prevent
> +this lock being placed, then
> +.BR fcntl ()
> +returns details about one of these locks in the
> +.IR l_type ", " l_whence ", " l_start ", and " l_len
> +fields of
> +.I lock
> +.
> +If the conflicting lock is a traditional POSIX lock, then the
> +.I l_pid
> +will be set to the PID of the process holding that lock. If the
> +conflicting lock is a file-private lock, then the
> +.I l_pid
> +will be set to -1.
> .SS Mandatory locking
> (Non-POSIX.)
> The above record locks may be either advisory or mandatory,
> --
> 1.8.4.2
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/

2014-04-15 20:25:50

by Jeff Layton

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] fcntl.2: update manpage with verbiage about file-private locks

On Tue, 15 Apr 2014 22:08:50 +0200
"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hello Jeff,
>
> On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 3:23 PM, Jeff Layton <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Please don't merge this yet, as the kernel patches are still a work in
> > progress...
>
> Now that this has hit mainline, is this man page patch still current?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Michael
>

No, it needs a bit of a revision. I'm sorting through the glibc patches
now, and will plan to send a respin of this once that's complete.

Thanks!


> > Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > man2/fcntl.2 | 97 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > 1 file changed, 94 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/man2/fcntl.2 b/man2/fcntl.2
> > index 72dcd7b..74c67b6 100644
> > --- a/man2/fcntl.2
> > +++ b/man2/fcntl.2
> > @@ -208,7 +208,7 @@ struct flock {
> > off_t l_start; /* Starting offset for lock */
> > off_t l_len; /* Number of bytes to lock */
> > pid_t l_pid; /* PID of process blocking our lock
> > - (F_GETLK only) */
> > + (F_GETLK and F_GETLKP only) */
> > ...
> > };
> > .fi
> > @@ -344,9 +344,13 @@ returns details about one of these locks in the
> > .IR l_type ", " l_whence ", " l_start ", and " l_len
> > fields of
> > .I lock
> > -and sets
> > +.
> > +If the conflicting lock is a traditional POSIX lock, then the
> > .I l_pid
> > -to be the PID of the process holding that lock.
> > +will be set to the PID of the process holding that lock. If the
> > +conflicting lock is a file-private lock, then the
> > +.I l_pid
> > +will be set to -1.
> > .P
> > In order to place a read lock,
> > .I fd
> > @@ -386,6 +390,93 @@ should be avoided; use
> > and
> > .BR write (2)
> > instead.
> > +.SS File-private locking
> > +(Currently non-POSIX, but being proposed)
> > +.PP
> > +.BR F_GETLKP ", " F_SETLKP " and " F_SETLKPW
> > +are used to acquire, release and test file-private record locks. These
> > +are byte-range locks that work identically to the traditional advisory
> > +record locks described above, but are associated with the open file on
> > +which they were acquired rather than the process, much like locks
> > +acquired with
> > +.BR flock (2)
> > +.
> > +.PP
> > +Unlike traditional advisory record locks, these locks are inherited
> > +across
> > +.BR fork (2) ", " dup (2) " and " dup2 (2)
> > +and are only released on the last close of the open file instead of being
> > +released on any close of the file.
> > +.PP
> > +File-private locks always conflict with traditional record locks, even
> > +when they are acquired by the same process on the same file descriptor.
> > +They only conflict with each other when they are acquired on different
> > +open file descriptors.
> > +.TP
> > +.BR F_SETLKP " (\fIstruct flock *\fP)"
> > +Acquire a lock (when
> > +.I l_type
> > +is
> > +.B F_RDLCK
> > +or
> > +.BR F_WRLCK )
> > +or release a lock (when
> > +.I l_type
> > +is
> > +.BR F_UNLCK )
> > +on the bytes specified by the
> > +.IR l_whence ", " l_start ", and " l_len
> > +fields of
> > +.IR lock .
> > +If a conflicting lock is held by another process,
> > +this call returns \-1 and sets
> > +.I errno
> > +to
> > +.B EACCES
> > +or
> > +.BR EAGAIN .
> > +.TP
> > +.BR F_SETLKPW " (\fIstruct flock *\fP)"
> > +As for
> > +.BR F_SETLKP ,
> > +but if a conflicting lock is held on the file, then wait for that
> > +lock to be released.
> > +If a signal is caught while waiting, then the call is interrupted
> > +and (after the signal handler has returned)
> > +returns immediately (with return value \-1 and
> > +.I errno
> > +set to
> > +.BR EINTR ;
> > +see
> > +.BR signal (7)).
> > +.TP
> > +.BR F_GETLKP " (\fIstruct flock *\fP)"
> > +On input to this call,
> > +.I lock
> > +describes a lock we would like to place on the file.
> > +If the lock could be placed,
> > +.BR fcntl ()
> > +does not actually place it, but returns
> > +.B F_UNLCK
> > +in the
> > +.I l_type
> > +field of
> > +.I lock
> > +and leaves the other fields of the structure unchanged.
> > +If one or more incompatible locks would prevent
> > +this lock being placed, then
> > +.BR fcntl ()
> > +returns details about one of these locks in the
> > +.IR l_type ", " l_whence ", " l_start ", and " l_len
> > +fields of
> > +.I lock
> > +.
> > +If the conflicting lock is a traditional POSIX lock, then the
> > +.I l_pid
> > +will be set to the PID of the process holding that lock. If the
> > +conflicting lock is a file-private lock, then the
> > +.I l_pid
> > +will be set to -1.
> > .SS Mandatory locking
> > (Non-POSIX.)
> > The above record locks may be either advisory or mandatory,
> > --
> > 1.8.4.2
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
> > the body of a message to [email protected]
> > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
>
>


--
Jeff Layton <[email protected]>