From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
To: Bryan Henderson <hbryan@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Lennart Sorensen <lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca>,
Bodo Eggert <7eggert@gmx.de>, Diego Calleja <diegocg@gmail.com>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>, Meelis Roos <mroos@linux.ee>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Subject: Re: file offset corruption on 32-bit machines?
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 10:40:57 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080416094057.GB27898@shareable.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <OFCA827B78.F987C4A1-ON8825742C.00781E5A-8825742C.0079F2C9@us.ibm.com>
Bryan Henderson wrote:
> The easiest way to imagine a program not doing locking and being useful
> anyway (as long as the kernel is thread-safe) is to use the same arguments
> you use for the kernel doing it: there's a higher level user responsible
> for locking. The code in question doesn't guarantee that user writes all
> its stuff to the right place, but at least it guarantees that that user's
> lack of locking doesn't screw some other user of the file. It does that
> by ensuring it never seeks to a place the user doesn't own and that no two
> separate users ever access the file at the same time.
>
> I'd even like to accomodate the poor user trying to debug the broken
> locking in his application. He sees the file getting corrupted and
> immediately thinks, "what if my thread serialization isn't working right?"
> But he notices that the corruption isn't consistent with that hypothesis.
> He knows he was working with only the beginning and the end of the file
> and the corruption happened in the middle. So he wastes a week
> considering other hypotheses, including a kernel bug, until someone points
> out a paragraph in the lseek() man page that says contrary to all Unix
> convention, that particular function and system call is not thread-safe,
> and it doesn't necessarily seek to the place mentioned in its argument.
I think that argument is the strongest yet. Wasted debugging time due
to totally surprising and hardly justifiable kernel behaviour. Strace
/ GDB on the application shows a trace which doesn't relate at all to
the unexpected file changes.
There is also POSIX specification:
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/000095399/functions/xsh_chap02_09.html
"All functions defined by this volume of IEEE Std 1003.1-2001 shall
be thread-safe, except that the following functions need not be
thread-safe."
[List which does not include lseek(), therefore lseek() shall be
thread-safe. Same for read() and write().]
Docs for HP-UX and AIX say the same as POSIX about thread-safety.
-- Jamie
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-04-16 9:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <agh4d-6yc-35@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <ah5tY-3lR-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <ah5DA-3X9-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <ah5X5-4tl-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <ah66A-4Nk-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <ah7vN-7Wz-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
2008-04-11 12:24 ` file offset corruption on 32-bit machines? Bodo Eggert
2008-04-11 13:55 ` Lennart Sorensen
2008-04-11 16:59 ` Bryan Henderson
2008-04-11 17:15 ` Lennart Sorensen
2008-04-11 21:29 ` Bryan Henderson
2008-04-12 8:48 ` Pavel Machek
2008-04-14 16:20 ` Jan Kara
2008-04-14 16:22 ` Lennart Sorensen
2008-04-14 16:53 ` Jan Kara
2008-04-14 16:54 ` Alan Cox
2008-04-14 18:34 ` Alexey Dobriyan
2008-04-14 17:06 ` Lennart Sorensen
2008-04-14 19:03 ` Jan Kara
2008-04-14 19:29 ` Lennart Sorensen
2008-04-14 19:42 ` Jan Kara
2008-04-14 19:45 ` Lennart Sorensen
2008-04-15 8:57 ` Pavel Machek
2008-04-15 15:32 ` Lennart Sorensen
2008-04-15 17:34 ` Pavel Machek
2008-04-15 18:24 ` Lennart Sorensen
2008-04-15 19:12 ` Pavel Machek
2008-04-15 19:49 ` Lennart Sorensen
2008-04-15 20:06 ` Pavel Machek
2008-04-15 20:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-04-16 8:15 ` Pavel Machek
2008-04-16 8:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-04-16 10:54 ` Alan Cox
2008-04-16 13:57 ` Lennart Sorensen
2008-04-15 20:29 ` Lennart Sorensen
2008-04-15 22:11 ` Bryan Henderson
2008-04-16 9:40 ` Jamie Lokier [this message]
2008-04-08 8:05 Meelis Roos
2008-04-10 13:55 ` Michal Hocko
2008-04-10 14:01 ` Jiri Kosina
2008-04-10 14:27 ` Jan Kara
2008-04-10 14:31 ` Jiri Kosina
2008-04-10 14:48 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-04-10 15:22 ` Jan Kara
2008-04-10 15:30 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-04-10 15:19 ` Jan Kara
2008-04-10 15:37 ` Michal Hocko
2008-04-10 15:56 ` Jan Kara
2008-04-10 16:03 ` Diego Calleja
2008-04-10 16:15 ` Jan Kara
2008-04-11 19:26 ` Pavel Machek
2008-04-14 16:25 ` Jan Kara
2008-04-10 14:31 ` Michal Hocko
2008-04-10 14:35 ` Jiri Kosina
2008-04-10 14:11 ` Martin Mares
2008-04-10 15:12 ` Jan Kara
2008-04-10 15:14 ` Jamie Lokier
2008-04-10 15:21 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-04-10 15:28 ` Jan Kara
2008-04-10 15:33 ` Andi Kleen
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=20080416094057.GB27898@shareable.org \
--to=jamie@shareable.org \
--cc=7eggert@gmx.de \
--cc=diegocg@gmail.com \
--cc=hbryan@us.ibm.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jkosina@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=mroos@linux.ee \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
/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