From: "Aurélien Aptel" <aaptel@suse.com>
To: Pavel Shilovsky <piastryyy@gmail.com>, Tom Talpey <tom@talpey.com>
Cc: "Aurélien Aptel" <aaptel@suse.com>,
"Alejandro Colomar (man-pages)" <alx.manpages@gmail.com>,
"Steve French" <smfrench@gmail.com>,
linux-cifs <linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
mtk.manpages@gmail.com, linux-man@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v5] flock.2: add CIFS details
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 15:30:24 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210322143024.13930-1-aaptel@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKywueQkELXyRjihtD2G=vswVuaeoeyMjrDfqTQeVF_NoRVm6A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Aurelien Aptel <aaptel@suse.com>
CIFS flock() locks behave differently than the standard. Give overview
of those differences.
Here is the rendered text:
CIFS details
In Linux kernels up to 5.4, flock() is not propagated over SMB. A file
with such locks will not appear locked for remote clients.
Since Linux 5.5, flock() locks are emulated with SMB byte-range locks
on the entire file. Similarly to NFS, this means that fcntl(2) and
flock() locks interact with one another. Another important side-effect
is that the locks are not advisory anymore: any IO on a locked file
will always fail with EACCES when done from a separate file descriptor.
This difference originates from the design of locks in the SMB proto-
col, which provides mandatory locking semantics.
Remote and mandatory locking semantics may vary with SMB protocol,
mount options and server type. See mount.cifs(8) for additional infor-
mation.
Signed-off-by: Aurelien Aptel <aaptel@suse.com>
---
man2/flock.2 | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 25 insertions(+)
diff --git a/man2/flock.2 b/man2/flock.2
index 328377365..61822c9bc 100644
--- a/man2/flock.2
+++ b/man2/flock.2
@@ -239,6 +239,31 @@ see the discussion of the
.I "local_lock"
option in
.BR nfs (5).
+.SS CIFS details
+In Linux kernels up to 5.4,
+.BR flock ()
+is not propagated over SMB.
+A file with such locks will not appear locked for remote clients.
+.PP
+Since Linux 5.5,
+.BR flock ()
+locks are emulated with SMB byte-range locks on the entire file.
+Similarly to NFS, this means that
+.BR fcntl (2)
+and
+.BR flock ()
+locks interact with one another.
+Another important side-effect is that the locks are not advisory anymore:
+any IO on a locked file will always fail with
+.BR EACCES
+when done from a separate file descriptor.
+This difference originates from the design of locks in the SMB protocol,
+which provides mandatory locking semantics.
+.PP
+Remote and mandatory locking semantics may vary with SMB protocol, mount options and server type.
+See
+.BR mount.cifs (8)
+for additional information.
.SH SEE ALSO
.BR flock (1),
.BR close (2),
--
2.30.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-22 14:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-02 15:48 [man-pages][PATCH v1] flock.2: add CIFS details Aurélien Aptel
2021-03-03 15:37 ` Tom Talpey
2021-03-03 16:28 ` Aurélien Aptel
2021-03-03 16:37 ` [PATCH v2] " Aurélien Aptel
2021-03-03 18:08 ` Tom Talpey
2021-03-03 19:03 ` [PATCH v3] " Aurélien Aptel
2021-03-03 20:23 ` Tom Talpey
2021-03-04 9:48 ` Aurélien Aptel
2021-03-04 9:50 ` [PATCH v4] " Aurélien Aptel
2021-03-10 19:07 ` Alejandro Colomar (man-pages)
2021-03-11 10:11 ` Aurélien Aptel
2021-03-11 16:21 ` Tom Talpey
2021-03-11 17:13 ` Aurélien Aptel
2021-03-11 17:29 ` Tom Talpey
2021-03-11 17:45 ` Aurélien Aptel
2021-03-11 20:42 ` Tom Talpey
2021-03-11 22:39 ` Aurélien Aptel
2021-03-15 18:05 ` Pavel Shilovsky
2021-03-16 10:42 ` Aurélien Aptel
2021-03-16 17:39 ` Pavel Shilovsky
2021-03-16 19:42 ` Tom Talpey
2021-03-16 23:04 ` Pavel Shilovsky
2021-03-22 14:30 ` Aurélien Aptel [this message]
2021-04-09 12:13 ` [PATCH v5] " Aurélien Aptel
2021-04-11 19:12 ` Alejandro Colomar (man-pages)
2021-03-11 18:01 ` [PATCH v4] " Matthew Wilcox
2021-03-03 16:48 ` [man-pages][PATCH v1] " Tom Talpey
2021-03-03 16:57 ` Aurélien Aptel
2021-03-03 17:41 ` Tom Talpey
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=20210322143024.13930-1-aaptel@suse.com \
--to=aaptel@suse.com \
--cc=alx.manpages@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-man@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \
--cc=piastryyy@gmail.com \
--cc=smfrench@gmail.com \
--cc=tom@talpey.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).