On Wed, 01/18 14:02, Max Reitz wrote:
> >> Testing whether something is locked would be easier by using F_OFD_GETLK
> >> instead of actually creating an exclusive lock and then releasing it.
> >
> > My attempt to do this shows it doesn't work: fcntl forces the tested lock
> > type
> > to read loc
On 18.01.2017 11:48, Fam Zheng wrote:
> On Fri, 12/02 03:58, Max Reitz wrote:
>> On 31.10.2016 16:38, Fam Zheng wrote:
>>> This implements open flag sensible image locking for local file
>>> and host device protocol.
>>>
>>> virtlockd in libvirt locks the first byte, so we start looking at the
>>>
On Fri, 12/02 03:58, Max Reitz wrote:
> On 31.10.2016 16:38, Fam Zheng wrote:
> > This implements open flag sensible image locking for local file
> > and host device protocol.
> >
> > virtlockd in libvirt locks the first byte, so we start looking at the
> > file bytes from 1.
> >
> > Quoting what
On 31.10.2016 16:38, Fam Zheng wrote:
> This implements open flag sensible image locking for local file
> and host device protocol.
>
> virtlockd in libvirt locks the first byte, so we start looking at the
> file bytes from 1.
>
> Quoting what was proposed by Kevin Wolf , there are
> four locking
On 31.10.2016 16:38, Fam Zheng wrote:
> This implements open flag sensible image locking for local file
> and host device protocol.
>
> virtlockd in libvirt locks the first byte, so we start looking at the
> file bytes from 1.
>
> Quoting what was proposed by Kevin Wolf , there are
> four locking
This implements open flag sensible image locking for local file
and host device protocol.
virtlockd in libvirt locks the first byte, so we start looking at the
file bytes from 1.
Quoting what was proposed by Kevin Wolf , there are
four locking modes by combining two bits (BDRV_O_RDWR and
BDRV_O_S
