From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: dave@gnu.org, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locks: export device name
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 14:09:06 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120214190906.GA5115@fieldses.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120213163425.dd9adfde.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 04:34:25PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 22:06:07 +0100
> Davidlohr Bueso <dave@gnu.org> wrote:
>
> > From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@gnu.org>
> >
> > The lslk(8) program has not been maintained for over a decade and has recently been rewritten as lslocks(8).
> > It will be available for the next 2.22 release, in a couple of months. This is a good opportunity to delete
> > that nasty WE_CAN_BREAK_LSLK_NOW and start exporting the device name instead of the maj:min numbers.
> >
> > For backward compatibility the new version can be in charge of checking older kernel versions and parsing the old
> > output if necessary.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > --- a/fs/locks.c
> > +++ b/fs/locks.c
> > @@ -2199,15 +2199,8 @@ static void lock_get_status(struct seq_file *f, struct file_lock *fl,
> > : (fl->fl_type & F_WRLCK) ? "WRITE" : "READ ");
> > }
> > if (inode) {
> > -#ifdef WE_CAN_BREAK_LSLK_NOW
> > seq_printf(f, "%d %s:%ld ", fl_pid,
> > inode->i_sb->s_id, inode->i_ino);
> > -#else
> > - /* userspace relies on this representation of dev_t ;-( */
> > - seq_printf(f, "%d %02x:%02x:%ld ", fl_pid,
> > - MAJOR(inode->i_sb->s_dev),
> > - MINOR(inode->i_sb->s_dev), inode->i_ino);
> > -#endif
> > } else {
> > seq_printf(f, "%d <none>:0 ", fl_pid);
> > }
>
> I don't get it. This is an immediate and non-back-compatible change to
> the format of /proc/locks. The only way this can avoid breaking things
> is if there are no programs or scripts in use by anyone which use
> this field. What am I missing here?
I'm a little surprised anything parses that file.
But, yes, looks like I can "yum install" lslk on Fedora 16, as an
example. Can't get it to do anything useful, though. Does it actually
work on any recent distro?
Perhaps safest would be to replace /proc/locks by another interface and
deprecate this one.
--b.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-14 19:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-10 21:06 [PATCH] locks: export device name Davidlohr Bueso
2012-02-14 0:34 ` Andrew Morton
2012-02-14 19:09 ` J. Bruce Fields [this message]
2012-02-15 10:52 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2012-02-15 12:42 ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-02-15 20:39 ` Andrew Morton
2012-02-16 22:37 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2012-02-16 22:59 ` Andrew Morton
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=20120214190906.GA5115@fieldses.org \
--to=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dave@gnu.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
/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