From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:34276)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <jcody@redhat.com>) id 1TF2AQ-0007To-8x
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 08:17:15 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <jcody@redhat.com>) id 1TF2AP-0008CA-79
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 08:17:10 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:35330)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <jcody@redhat.com>) id 1TF2AO-0008C1-Ug
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 08:17:09 -0400
Message-ID: <505C5AC0.5090500@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 08:17:04 -0400
From: Jeff Cody <jcody@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <cover.1348157913.git.jcody@redhat.com>
	<71de241ac2e46041abdddd36683b2a1f82fb1e2c.1348157913.git.jcody@redhat.com>
	<505C2663.2030901@redhat.com> <505C28C1.2090609@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <505C28C1.2090609@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 15/19] block: raw-win32 driver reopen
	support
Reply-To: jcody@redhat.com
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>, supriyak@linux.vnet.ibm.com, eblake@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On 09/21/2012 04:43 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 21/09/2012 10:33, Kevin Wolf ha scritto:
>>>> +    /* could not reopen the file handle, so fall back to opening
>>>> +     * new file (CreateFile) */
>>>> +    if (raw_s->hfile == INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE) {
>>>> +        raw_s->hfile = CreateFile(state->bs->filename, access_flags,
>>>> +                                  FILE_SHARE_READ, NULL, OPEN_EXISTING,
>>>> +                                  overlapped, NULL);
>>>> +        if (raw_s->hfile == INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE) {
>>>> +            /* this could happen because the access_flags requested are
>>>> +             * incompatible with the existing share mode of s->hfile,
>>>> +             * so our only option now is to close s->hfile, and try again.
>>>> +             * This could end badly */
>>>> +            CloseHandle(s->hfile);
>> How common is this case?
>>
>> We do have another option, namely not reopen at all and return an error.
>> Of course, this only makes sense if it doesn't mean that we almost never
>> succeed.
> 
> Probably pretty common since we specify FILE_SHARE_READ for the sharing
> mode, meaning that "subsequent open operations on a file or device are
> only able to request read access".
> 

Yes, I think this is by far the most common case.


> I would change it to FILE_SHARE_READ|FILE_SHARE_WRITE and remove this code.
> 
> Paolo
> 

I contemplated doing that, but I wasn't sure if there was any particular
reason it was originally done with FILE_SHARE_READ only in the first
place (security, etc..). I was hesitant to override that behaviour as
the new default under w32.  Do we know if this is acceptable / safe?