From: Stas Sergeev <stsp2@yandex.ru>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Stas Sergeev <stsp2@yandex.ru>, Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] fs/locks: F_UNLCK extension for F_OFD_GETLK
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 14:55:05 +0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230620095507.2677463-2-stsp2@yandex.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230620095507.2677463-1-stsp2@yandex.ru>
Currently F_UNLCK with F_OFD_GETLK returns -EINVAL.
The proposed extension allows to use it for getting the lock
information from the particular fd.
Signed-off-by: Stas Sergeev <stsp2@yandex.ru>
CC: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
CC: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
CC: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
CC: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
CC: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
---
fs/locks.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
index df8b26a42524..210766007e63 100644
--- a/fs/locks.c
+++ b/fs/locks.c
@@ -868,6 +868,21 @@ static bool posix_locks_conflict(struct file_lock *caller_fl,
return locks_conflict(caller_fl, sys_fl);
}
+/* Determine if lock sys_fl blocks lock caller_fl. Used on xx_GETLK
+ * path so checks for additional GETLK-specific things like F_UNLCK.
+ */
+static bool posix_test_locks_conflict(struct file_lock *caller_fl,
+ struct file_lock *sys_fl)
+{
+ /* F_UNLCK checks any locks on the same fd. */
+ if (caller_fl->fl_type == F_UNLCK) {
+ if (!posix_same_owner(caller_fl, sys_fl))
+ return false;
+ return locks_overlap(caller_fl, sys_fl);
+ }
+ return posix_locks_conflict(caller_fl, sys_fl);
+}
+
/* Determine if lock sys_fl blocks lock caller_fl. FLOCK specific
* checking before calling the locks_conflict().
*/
@@ -901,7 +916,7 @@ posix_test_lock(struct file *filp, struct file_lock *fl)
retry:
spin_lock(&ctx->flc_lock);
list_for_each_entry(cfl, &ctx->flc_posix, fl_list) {
- if (!posix_locks_conflict(fl, cfl))
+ if (!posix_test_locks_conflict(fl, cfl))
continue;
if (cfl->fl_lmops && cfl->fl_lmops->lm_lock_expirable
&& (*cfl->fl_lmops->lm_lock_expirable)(cfl)) {
@@ -2207,7 +2222,8 @@ int fcntl_getlk(struct file *filp, unsigned int cmd, struct flock *flock)
if (fl == NULL)
return -ENOMEM;
error = -EINVAL;
- if (flock->l_type != F_RDLCK && flock->l_type != F_WRLCK)
+ if (cmd != F_OFD_GETLK && flock->l_type != F_RDLCK
+ && flock->l_type != F_WRLCK)
goto out;
error = flock_to_posix_lock(filp, fl, flock);
@@ -2414,7 +2430,8 @@ int fcntl_getlk64(struct file *filp, unsigned int cmd, struct flock64 *flock)
return -ENOMEM;
error = -EINVAL;
- if (flock->l_type != F_RDLCK && flock->l_type != F_WRLCK)
+ if (cmd != F_OFD_GETLK && flock->l_type != F_RDLCK
+ && flock->l_type != F_WRLCK)
goto out;
error = flock64_to_posix_lock(filp, fl, flock);
--
2.39.2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-20 10:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-20 9:55 [PATCH 0/3] RFC: F_OFD_GETLK should provide more info Stas Sergeev
2023-06-20 9:55 ` Stas Sergeev [this message]
2023-06-20 10:46 ` [PATCH 1/3] fs/locks: F_UNLCK extension for F_OFD_GETLK Jeff Layton
2023-06-20 11:00 ` stsp
2023-06-20 11:15 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-21 15:24 ` stsp
2023-06-20 9:55 ` [PATCH 2/3] fd/locks: allow get the lock owner by F_OFD_GETLK Stas Sergeev
2023-06-20 10:51 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-20 10:57 ` stsp
2023-06-20 11:12 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-20 11:45 ` stsp
2023-06-20 12:02 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-20 12:34 ` stsp
2023-06-20 13:19 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-20 13:39 ` stsp
2023-06-20 13:46 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-06-20 13:47 ` stsp
2023-06-20 14:36 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-06-20 15:45 ` stsp
2023-06-20 17:05 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-06-21 2:54 ` stsp
2023-06-23 13:10 ` David Laight
2023-06-20 13:58 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-21 6:57 ` stsp
2023-06-21 10:35 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-21 10:42 ` stsp
2023-06-21 11:05 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-21 11:22 ` stsp
2023-06-21 11:26 ` stsp
2023-06-23 15:25 ` Christian Brauner
2023-06-23 17:18 ` stsp
2023-06-27 16:00 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-27 16:20 ` stsp
2023-06-20 9:55 ` [PATCH 3/3] selftests: add OFD lock tests Stas Sergeev
2023-06-20 11:06 ` Jeff Layton
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=20230620095507.2677463-2-stsp2@yandex.ru \
--to=stsp2@yandex.ru \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--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