On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:18:15AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Simo wrote:
> > On 03/05/2013 01:13 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 05:49:46PM -0500, Simo wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 03/04/2013 04:19 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>
>
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Simo wrote:
> On 03/05/2013 01:13 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 05:49:46PM -0500, Simo wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03/04/2013 04:19 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 01:53:25PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
>
2013/3/5 Simo :
> On 03/05/2013 01:13 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 05:49:46PM -0500, Simo wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03/04/2013 04:19 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
I'm a little more worried: these are mandatory locks, and applications
that use them are used to the locks
2013/3/5 Simo s...@samba.org:
On 03/05/2013 01:13 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 05:49:46PM -0500, Simo wrote:
On 03/04/2013 04:19 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
I'm a little more worried: these are mandatory locks, and applications
that use them are used to the locks being
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Simo s...@samba.org wrote:
On 03/05/2013 01:13 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 05:49:46PM -0500, Simo wrote:
On 03/04/2013 04:19 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 01:53:25PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
[possible resend
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:18:15AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Simo s...@samba.org wrote:
On 03/05/2013 01:13 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 05:49:46PM -0500, Simo wrote:
On 03/04/2013 04:19 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Thu,
On 03/05/2013 01:13 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 05:49:46PM -0500, Simo wrote:
On 03/04/2013 04:19 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 01:53:25PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
[possible resend -- sorry]
On 02/28/2013 07:25 AM, Pavel Shilovsky wrote:
This
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 05:49:46PM -0500, Simo wrote:
> On 03/04/2013 04:19 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> >On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 01:53:25PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> >>[possible resend -- sorry]
> >>
> >>On 02/28/2013 07:25 AM, Pavel Shilovsky wrote:
> >>>This patchset adds support of
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 05:49:46PM -0500, Simo wrote:
On 03/04/2013 04:19 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 01:53:25PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
[possible resend -- sorry]
On 02/28/2013 07:25 AM, Pavel Shilovsky wrote:
This patchset adds support of O_DENY* flags for
On 03/05/2013 01:13 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 05:49:46PM -0500, Simo wrote:
On 03/04/2013 04:19 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 01:53:25PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
[possible resend -- sorry]
On 02/28/2013 07:25 AM, Pavel Shilovsky wrote:
This
On 03/04/2013 04:19 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 01:53:25PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
[possible resend -- sorry]
On 02/28/2013 07:25 AM, Pavel Shilovsky wrote:
This patchset adds support of O_DENY* flags for Linux fs layer. These flags can
be used by any application
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 01:53:25PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> [possible resend -- sorry]
>
> On 02/28/2013 07:25 AM, Pavel Shilovsky wrote:
> > This patchset adds support of O_DENY* flags for Linux fs layer. These flags
> > can be used by any application that needs share reservations to
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 01:53:25PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
[possible resend -- sorry]
On 02/28/2013 07:25 AM, Pavel Shilovsky wrote:
This patchset adds support of O_DENY* flags for Linux fs layer. These flags
can be used by any application that needs share reservations to organize a
On 03/04/2013 04:19 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 01:53:25PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
[possible resend -- sorry]
On 02/28/2013 07:25 AM, Pavel Shilovsky wrote:
This patchset adds support of O_DENY* flags for Linux fs layer. These flags can
be used by any application
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 01:53:25PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > O_DENYMAND - to switch on/off three flags above.
>
> O_DENYMAND doesn't deny anything. Would a name like O_RESPECT_DENY be
> better?
Possibly rename to O_CHECK_DENY ?
David
--
David Laight: da...@l8s.co.uk
--
To
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 01:53:25PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
O_DENYMAND - to switch on/off three flags above.
O_DENYMAND doesn't deny anything. Would a name like O_RESPECT_DENY be
better?
Possibly rename to O_CHECK_DENY ?
David
--
David Laight: da...@l8s.co.uk
--
To
2013/3/1 Andy Lutomirski :
> [possible resend -- sorry]
>
> On 02/28/2013 07:25 AM, Pavel Shilovsky wrote:
>> This patchset adds support of O_DENY* flags for Linux fs layer. These flags
>> can be used by any application that needs share reservations to organize a
>> file access. VFS already has
[possible resend -- sorry]
On 02/28/2013 07:25 AM, Pavel Shilovsky wrote:
> This patchset adds support of O_DENY* flags for Linux fs layer. These flags
> can be used by any application that needs share reservations to organize a
> file access. VFS already has some sort of this capability - now
This patchset adds support of O_DENY* flags for Linux fs layer. These flags can
be used by any application that needs share reservations to organize a file
access. VFS already has some sort of this capability - now it's done through
flock/LOCK_MAND mechanis, but that approach is non-atomic.
This patchset adds support of O_DENY* flags for Linux fs layer. These flags can
be used by any application that needs share reservations to organize a file
access. VFS already has some sort of this capability - now it's done through
flock/LOCK_MAND mechanis, but that approach is non-atomic.
[possible resend -- sorry]
On 02/28/2013 07:25 AM, Pavel Shilovsky wrote:
This patchset adds support of O_DENY* flags for Linux fs layer. These flags
can be used by any application that needs share reservations to organize a
file access. VFS already has some sort of this capability - now
2013/3/1 Andy Lutomirski l...@amacapital.net:
[possible resend -- sorry]
On 02/28/2013 07:25 AM, Pavel Shilovsky wrote:
This patchset adds support of O_DENY* flags for Linux fs layer. These flags
can be used by any application that needs share reservations to organize a
file access. VFS
22 matches
Mail list logo