All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [uml-devel] os_lock_file removal
@ 2005-06-24 19:19 Allan Graves
  2005-06-24 21:15 ` Jeff Dike
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Allan Graves @ 2005-06-24 19:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: user-mode-linux-devel

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 719 bytes --]

Hi guys.  I'm working on developing a cluster file system and I'd like 
to simulate concurrent shared storage access using uml and disk files.  
I traced down the file locking, and it seems that (assuming I have a 
cluster file system that keeps things up to date in the metadata of the 
filesystem) if I remove this function I should be able to have more than 
1 instance accessing storage at the same time.  I realize this is a bit 
dangerous, since it involves *all* block devices,  but I don't see a 
much better way.  COW is not what I'm looking for, and that seems to be 
the standard answer.  Can anyone provide positive or negative feedback 
on this approach?  Possibly a better approach? 
Thanks,
Allan Graves

[-- Attachment #2: allan.graves.vcf --]
[-- Type: text/x-vcard, Size: 147 bytes --]

begin:vcard
fn:Allan Graves
n:Graves;Allan
email;internet:allan.graves@oracle.com
tel;work:603-8973276
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
version:2.1
end:vcard


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* Re: [uml-devel] os_lock_file removal
  2005-06-24 19:19 [uml-devel] os_lock_file removal Allan Graves
@ 2005-06-24 21:15 ` Jeff Dike
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Dike @ 2005-06-24 21:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Allan Graves; +Cc: user-mode-linux-devel

On Fri, Jun 24, 2005 at 03:19:53PM -0400, Allan Graves wrote:
> Hi guys.  I'm working on developing a cluster file system and I'd like 
> to simulate concurrent shared storage access using uml and disk files.  
> I traced down the file locking, and it seems that (assuming I have a 
> cluster file system that keeps things up to date in the metadata of the 
> filesystem) if I remove this function I should be able to have more than 
> 1 instance accessing storage at the same time.  

Feel free to remove it if you personally guarantee that you will not run
two UMLs on the same host file without using a clusterfs.

It's purely a safety measure - if you're doing development using scratch
filesystems, it's not really benefitting you.

				Jeff


-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
_______________________________________________
User-mode-linux-devel mailing list
User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2005-06-24 21:58 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2005-06-24 19:19 [uml-devel] os_lock_file removal Allan Graves
2005-06-24 21:15 ` Jeff Dike

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.