[lockdev-devel] Current status

[Ludwig Nussel]

Roger Leigh wrote:
> I've applied (I think) all outstanding patches and pushed them.  Is
> there anything I missed that still needs applying?

I think it's complete now, thanks.

> Since we're writing the PID into the lockfile, what's the
> purpose of the "LCK...<pid>" lock?  It's broken if a program takes
> out multiple locks (quite possible, if not typical).  Do we have any
> active users of this lockfile?

IMO it's superflous.

> For this reason alone, I'm wondering if we shouldn't restrict the
> LCK..<devname> to serial devices where we can use ttyname(3) to obtain
> the canonical name when creating the lock.  For other devices we can
> just use the completely reliable device number.

The LCK..<devname> locks are not reliable one way or another. They
are not meant to use a 'canoncial' name by resolving symlinks either
IIRC.

> Since we're creating multiple lock files, could we also add a variant
> on LK.<devmajor>.<major>.<minor>. which drops the pointless devmajor?
> This just makes it totally reliable in the face of device nodes outside
> /dev or on mounts under /dev e.g. /dev/pts where the filesystem is on
> a different device (or under /sys).  Doing both keeps backward
> compatibility with the SVr4 naming and fixes the buggy behaviour.

Sure, I wonder why one would want to lock a device outside of /dev
though.

cu
Ludwig

-- 
 (o_   Ludwig Nussel
 //\   
 V_/_  http://www.suse.de/
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg)