Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 19 Jan 2021 18:44:32 +0100
From:   Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
To:     Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
Cc:     Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
        Michael Petlan <mpetlan@redhat.com>,
        Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>,
        Alexei Budankov <abudankov@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/22] perf daemon: Allow only one daemon over base
 directory
Message-ID: <20210119174432.GC1717058@krava>
References: <20210102220441.794923-1-jolsa@kernel.org>
 <20210102220441.794923-13-jolsa@kernel.org>
 <CAM9d7cj7TaJH3CtkQDjfD9OuV77LzbcY4y_EW7PWi+winu8gcw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAM9d7cj7TaJH3CtkQDjfD9OuV77LzbcY4y_EW7PWi+winu8gcw@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 02:37:42PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:

SNIP

> >
> > +static int check_lock(struct daemon *daemon)
> > +{
> > +       char path[PATH_MAX];
> > +       char buf[20];
> > +       int fd, pid;
> > +       ssize_t len;
> > +
> > +       scnprintf(path, sizeof(path), "%s/lock", daemon->base);
> > +
> > +       fd = open(path, O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_CLOEXEC, 0640);
> > +       if (fd < 0)
> > +               return -1;
> > +
> > +       if (lockf(fd, F_TLOCK, 0) < 0) {
> > +               filename__read_int(path, &pid);
> > +               fprintf(stderr, "failed: another perf daemon (pid %d) owns %s\n",
> > +                       pid, daemon->base);
> > +               return -1;
> > +       }
> 
> So the fd is (a kind of) leaked and the lock is released only when
> the daemon is going to die, right?

yes, that's the idea, I'll put it in some comment

thanks,
jirka