From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] cdrom weirdness
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2008 14:08:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081204130851.GV18255@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081204041450.GH28946@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
On Thu, Dec 04 2008, Al Viro wrote:
> 1) CDROM_LOCKDOOR sets a global variable (keeplocked) that affects all
> cdroms. Intentional?
It's always been so, predates me. Pretty ugly, I don't think anyone
would mind if that was changed to be per-device when the ioctl is ussed
:-)
> 2) cdrom_dvd_rw_close_write() call can be delayed indefinitely by keeping
> an ioctl-only (opened with O_NDELAY) descriptor.
Yep, not sure what you want me to say here...
> 3) open cdrom for data, have the door locked, keep fd opened.
> open it again for write, have the open fail and cleanup in cdrom_open()
> will happily unlock the door for you. I'd change that to "lock if we
> had no lockers, unlock on failure exit if we did lock", but there's
> an interesting comment:
> /* Something failed. Try to unlock the drive, because some drivers
> (notably ide-cd) lock the drive after every command.
> ...
> What the hell is that about? It's not "some drivers", AFAICT - it's
> been done explicitly in open_for_data(). Or is there something
> really driver-specific in it?
>
> 4) while we are at it, if you clear lockdoor via sysctl while something has
> cdrom opened - no unlock on close for you.
>
> 5) autoeject happens on the last close *IF* the last file happens to be
> opened for data. IOW, if some crap has opened it ioctl-only and kept
> that opened after everyone else has closed - no autoeject for you.
Most of the above are long known issues with not counting
write/non-write/ioctls opens, since it was tricky/impossible to do
because of fcntl().
> 6) /*
> * flush cache on last write release
> */
> if (CDROM_CAN(CDC_RAM) && !cdi->use_count && cdi->for_data)
> cdrom_close_write(cdi);
> is interesting, seeing that nothing has ever touched ->for_data, for
> values of "ever" including "since the code in question had been merged
> into the tree"...
Hmm weird, you are right. The member was added in 2.6.2, but never used
except here. I guess this just needs to use opened_for_data.
--
Jens Axboe
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-12-04 13:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-04 4:14 [RFC] cdrom weirdness Al Viro
2008-12-04 13:08 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
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=20081204130851.GV18255@kernel.dk \
--to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
/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