From: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
To: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org,
Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>,
Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>,
Kristoffer Haugsbakk <kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] compat/mingw: support POSIX semantics for atomic renames
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2024 18:27:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zx54B6FdGprtH0HV@pks.im> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49619b52-0fea-4179-a829-7ec4a6945055@kdbg.org>
On Sun, Oct 27, 2024 at 05:31:00PM +0100, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> Am 27.10.24 um 16:38 schrieb Patrick Steinhardt:
> > On Sun, Oct 27, 2024 at 02:23:28PM +0100, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> >> Am 24.10.24 um 13:46 schrieb Patrick Steinhardt:
> >>> Windows 10 has introduced the `FILE_RENAME_FLAG_POSIX_SEMANTICS` flag
> >>> that allows us to fix this usecase [1]. When set, it is possible to
> >>> rename a file over a preexisting file even when the target file still
> >>> has handles open. Those handles must have been opened with the
> >>> `FILE_SHARE_DELETE` flag, which we have ensured in the preceding
> >>> commits.
> >>>> Careful readers might have noticed that [1] does not mention the above
> >>> flag, but instead mentions `FILE_RENAME_POSIX_SEMANTICS`. This flag is
> >>> not for use with `SetFileInformationByHandle()` though, which is what we
> >>> use. And while the `FILE_RENAME_FLAG_POSIX_SEMANTICS` flag exists, it is
> >>> not documented on [2] or anywhere else as far as I can tell.
> >>
> >> The Windows 10 SDK defines FILE_RENAME_FLAG_REPLACE_IF_EXISTS and
> >> FILE_RENAME_FLAG_POSIX_SEMANTICS for SetFileInformationByHandle(). That
> >> the documentation lacks "_FLAG_" in the names must be an error in the
> >> documentation.
> >>
> >> I found the mention of FILE_RENAME_POSIX_SEMANTICS quite distracting,
> >> because it is a flag to be used with CreateFileW() and basically only
> >> has to do with case-sensitivity, but nothing with POSIX semantics of
> >> renaming.
> >
> > I'd still prefer to mention this, because otherwise an astute reader
> > might notice that I'm using a different flag name than what is
> > documented in the docs and figure out that I defined the wrong flag
> > name.
>
> Ah, I was confused twice here. First, the documentation that you cite[*]
> mentions FILE_RENAME_POSIX_SEMANTICS, but the name does not exist at
> all. There does exist FILE_RENAME_FLAG_POSIX_SEMANTICS. The
> documentation is just wrong. And in my earlier comment I copied the
> inexistent flag name.
>
> But I meant to cite this flag: FILE_FLAG_POSIX_SEMANTICS (no "RENAME").
> It exists and is for CreateFileW().
>
> Perhaps you also meant cite the latter one as the flag that "is not for
> use with `SetFileInformationByHandle()`"?
>
> At any rate, the paragraph as written isn't correct.
I think I'm missing something. That's what the paragraph says:
Careful readers might have noticed that [1] does not mention the above
flag, but instead mentions `FILE_RENAME_POSIX_SEMANTICS`. This flag is
not for use with `SetFileInformationByHandle()` though, which is what we
use. And while the `FILE_RENAME_FLAG_POSIX_SEMANTICS` flag exists, it is
not documented on [2] or anywhere else as far as I can tell.
And I'd claim it is correct.
`FILE_RENAME_POSIX_SEMANTICS` exists, this it is not a documentation
error. It is at a lower level than `FILE_RENAME_FLAG_POSIX_SEMANTICS`,
the documentation at [1] refers to "ntifs.h", which is part of the
Windows Driver Kit interfaces. So it is not supposed to be used with
`SetFileInformationByHandle()`, but with `FtlSetInformationFile()` [2],
which _also_ has a separate `FILE_RENAME_INFO` structure that looks the
same as `FILE_RENAME_INFO` defined for `SetFileInformationByHandle()`.
The only difference as far as I can tell is that the flags used for
these structures have slightly different names.
Now I totally get your confusion -- I have been extremely confused by
all of this, as well. It certainly is a documentation error that the
respective `FILE_RENAME_FLAG_POSIX_SEMANTICS` is undocumented, but
having proper docs for this is rather important such that the reader
knows what its behaviour is. So I have no other choice than to link to
the ntifs interfaces, as it documents the actual behaviour, even though
it lives in a different part of the Windows APIs.
Patrick
[1]: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/ddi/ntifs/ns-ntifs-_file_rename_information
[2]: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/ddi/fltkernel/nf-fltkernel-fltsetinformationfile
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-27 17:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-23 15:04 [PATCH 0/3] compat/mingw: implement POSIX-style atomic renames Patrick Steinhardt
2024-10-23 15:04 ` [PATCH 1/3] compat/mingw: share file handles created via `CreateFileW()` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-10-23 16:18 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2024-10-23 17:25 ` Taylor Blau
2024-10-23 17:23 ` Taylor Blau
2024-10-23 17:25 ` Taylor Blau
2024-10-24 6:30 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-10-27 13:14 ` Johannes Sixt
2024-10-27 23:46 ` Taylor Blau
2024-10-23 15:05 ` [PATCH 2/3] compat/mingw: allow deletion of most opened files Patrick Steinhardt
2024-10-23 16:17 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2024-10-23 17:30 ` Taylor Blau
2024-10-24 6:30 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-10-23 18:07 ` Taylor Blau
2024-10-23 15:05 ` [PATCH 3/3] compat/mingw: support POSIX semantics for atomic renames Patrick Steinhardt
2024-10-23 16:19 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2024-10-24 6:30 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-10-24 7:18 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2024-10-24 7:20 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-10-23 18:30 ` Taylor Blau
2024-10-23 15:36 ` [PATCH 0/3] compat/mingw: implement POSIX-style " Taylor Blau
2024-10-24 11:46 ` [PATCH v2 " Patrick Steinhardt
2024-10-24 11:46 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] compat/mingw: share file handles created via `CreateFileW()` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-10-24 11:46 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] compat/mingw: allow deletion of most opened files Patrick Steinhardt
2024-10-27 13:17 ` Johannes Sixt
2024-10-27 15:38 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-10-27 23:48 ` Taylor Blau
2024-10-27 23:51 ` Taylor Blau
2024-10-24 11:46 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] compat/mingw: support POSIX semantics for atomic renames Patrick Steinhardt
2024-10-27 13:23 ` Johannes Sixt
2024-10-27 15:38 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-10-27 16:31 ` Johannes Sixt
2024-10-27 17:27 ` Patrick Steinhardt [this message]
2024-10-27 21:36 ` Johannes Sixt
2024-10-27 23:50 ` Taylor Blau
2024-10-24 16:47 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] compat/mingw: implement POSIX-style " Taylor Blau
2024-10-27 13:27 ` Johannes Sixt
2024-10-27 15:39 ` [PATCH v3 " Patrick Steinhardt
2024-10-27 15:39 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] compat/mingw: share file handles created via `CreateFileW()` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-10-27 15:39 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] compat/mingw: allow deletion of most opened files Patrick Steinhardt
2024-10-27 15:39 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] compat/mingw: support POSIX semantics for atomic renames Patrick Steinhardt
2024-11-06 3:54 ` [PATCH v3 0/3] compat/mingw: implement POSIX-style " Junio C Hamano
2024-11-06 6:44 ` Johannes Sixt
2024-11-06 12:09 ` Junio C Hamano
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Zx54B6FdGprtH0HV@pks.im \
--to=ps@pks.im \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=j6t@kdbg.org \
--cc=johannes.schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com \
--cc=me@ttaylorr.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).