Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from mail-pd0-f179.google.com ([209.85.192.179]:40821 "EHLO mail-pd0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751996AbaATJ42 (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jan 2014 04:56:28 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <051001cf13b4$080833b0$18189b10$@mindspring.com> References: <1389953232-9428-1-git-send-email-piastry@etersoft.ru> <051001cf13b4$080833b0$18189b10$@mindspring.com> Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 13:56:26 +0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/7] Add O_DENY* support for VFS and CIFS/NFS From: Pavel Shilovsky To: Frank Filz Cc: Kernel Mailing List , linux-cifs , linux-fsdevel , Linux NFS Mailing list , wine-devel@winehq.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: 2014/1/17 Frank Filz : > This looks wonderful and will be useful to the Ganesha user space NFS server > also. > > I do have a couple questions. > > 1. How will this interact with the idea of private locks from the patch set > Jeff Layton has been pushing? They don't touch each other. > > 2. If a process opens multiple file descriptors with deny modes, will they > conflict with each other (which is the behavior we will want for Ganesha). Yes, a deny mode is associated with file descriptor - so, it will conflict with any other access/deny modes of file descriptors from any process. > > 3. Is there any functionality to upgrade or downgrade the access and deny > modes (thinking in terms of NFS v4 support of OPEN upgrade and > OPEN_DOWNGRADE operations). The proposed patchset doesn't allow to change deny modes after an open is done. But we can add a functionality to let flock syscall change deny modes as on option. -- Best regards, Pavel Shilovsky.