Received: by 2002:a05:6358:3188:b0:123:57c1:9b43 with SMTP id q8csp7657751rwd; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 04:35:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ7/Jjsu6bM54gjua/EbmszO5+4EIMVQNer6TduNwhbfkurxxE5CWWFzOTzukL8+lCOLoh14 X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a20:7489:b0:118:1a20:79ab with SMTP id p9-20020a056a20748900b001181a2079abmr12964057pzd.4.1687260928143; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 04:35:28 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1687260928; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=ssk/agSb8cs/bf22FLQHOkQyUfAPK7ru+slgYJE+yThcWdLl6Qx/R3P+nrju3t1yz/ 0PTsWkn/hSNzluqNFXB/RQNu9d8/9aec/2KxPByjGogHYRlEIPbHBWopAZ0rv+du10Ro IYY4iKmQulRlxtqeOaSvlAeiMx63ZGElHt7XXVwcRdssb3fPJ/iCsrAcrEGONYov+9zD HaLcABUkO8IZY8j9023D1OlzGWGRtdg83VMdpesMG7jWSkZ6YEAQ03PJ437mL3+5LPRv tkPqw0v0r9i8UzUntFBgtLKTDBNUdT/4I2MNEzsfEuQtDCwNtEgmsyZMib+xXRUAgRVP giaA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:mime-version:user-agent :content-transfer-encoding:references:in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from :subject:message-id:dkim-signature; bh=cC0MPMJL3R3vblLtVBIyda0C3daqE0ZQwlBdI+Gxubg=; b=02v8+2JJ9ZCLMfe+lxIZf4Omyk+yK0Z2Uhya89Z6MIPrNRi23I+2MtC+A2YECExHcW 59P39xMrBTIVovRbytUOa2tX1+GmWvSFeRWW2rGCrbhtRm6njQgSTVXkXOVVBi576UXz HLAonFIjHzRnMf5ferPHYmnPjLSgHnKAh9HKVZCfae1gQy1i8hQe0bCmIQcIJLoWq+x0 SrnWc3lfI8sJDfATLaC6h/u7yMI9MI80DWzvx6sqMAiuOxn5Q9qMAd9Lzsy4XCwvA0uF wKY17XvVaumkSN+61TnW+zfYBZQf+fc9FzPwTUYy3FB3HQ1drYZKyTZfUiZeNGbAUAXP 1Z/w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=uuJQ0BEj; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email. [2620:137:e000::1:20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id e7-20020a056a0000c700b006666cc2f03csi1475782pfj.296.2023.06.20.04.35.08; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 04:35:28 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=uuJQ0BEj; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232324AbjFTKvt (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 20 Jun 2023 06:51:49 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:36444 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231351AbjFTKvp (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jun 2023 06:51:45 -0400 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4641:c500::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8431ECC; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 03:51:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1BB8161083; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 10:51:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E049EC433C8; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 10:51:42 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1687258303; bh=i86LPEOlOqpx7HI3CWxGcRqaB9ZXh9sljcD8rZYOYO8=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=uuJQ0BEjYCGeN2dM1Ot4aAeFXYLM1uKNyCTpqUbi9vuX5uoLZgMd12vDMzn7ZG8C+ nDl3HMNYeXDL6jE4rhfKzfUTJAqu7YtB8frKrSBtx7xZ4SYFKQYumYszXY273whhvT f/RSmRvFhVXSeMhgBxDH6Njc/FsIjG7cdVIIlnFqgUH9ElweY7hiXu0JUu67F7I/Mi ZyIpXn+oyizgx5zTEo/IHlsFmhfLgla+oGzwRaPZmMP02/CLF2+Qc32kbjMNaKSSx1 hjL02+jlGUl3RMTGlDjkqRQ03qkOY70OBPmnH8WccCRbM/42e4iPKSr/pSEUJLKNxD h/SkYIXEywigQ== Message-ID: <5728ebda22a723b0eb209ae078e8f132d7b4ac7b.camel@kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] fd/locks: allow get the lock owner by F_OFD_GETLK From: Jeff Layton To: Stas Sergeev , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Chuck Lever , Alexander Viro , Christian Brauner , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 06:51:41 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20230620095507.2677463-3-stsp2@yandex.ru> References: <20230620095507.2677463-1-stsp2@yandex.ru> <20230620095507.2677463-3-stsp2@yandex.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.48.3 (3.48.3-1.fc38) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2023-06-20 at 14:55 +0500, Stas Sergeev wrote: > Currently F_OFD_GETLK sets the pid of the lock owner to -1. > Remove such behavior to allow getting the proper owner's pid. > This may be helpful when you want to send some message (like SIGKILL) > to the offending locker. >=20 > Signed-off-by: Stas Sergeev >=20 > CC: Jeff Layton > CC: Chuck Lever > CC: Alexander Viro > CC: Christian Brauner > CC: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org > CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >=20 > --- > fs/locks.c | 2 -- > 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) >=20 > diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c > index 210766007e63..ee265e166542 100644 > --- a/fs/locks.c > +++ b/fs/locks.c > @@ -2158,8 +2158,6 @@ static pid_t locks_translate_pid(struct file_lock *= fl, struct pid_namespace *ns) > pid_t vnr; > struct pid *pid; > =20 > - if (IS_OFDLCK(fl)) > - return -1; > if (IS_REMOTELCK(fl)) > return fl->fl_pid; > /* NACK on this one. OFD locks are not owned by processes. They are owned by the file description (hence the name). Because of this, returning a pid here is wrong. This precedent comes from BSD, where flock() and POSIX locks can conflict. BSD returns -1 for the pid if you call F_GETLK on a file locked with flock(). Since OFD locks have similar ownership semantics to flock() locks, we use the same convention here. Cheers,=20 --=20 Jeff Layton