On 2/21/06, Oleg Drokin <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello!
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 03:15:53PM +0100, Antonio Vargas wrote:
> > > > We would need to understand whether this is needed by other distributed
> > > > filesystems and if so, whether the proposed implementation is suitable and
> > > > sufficient.
> > > Hmm.... We might possibly want to use that for NFSv4 at some point in
> > > order to deny write access to the file to other clients while it is in
> > > use.
> > When done with regards to failing a write if anyone has mapped the
> > file for executing it, or failing the execute if it's open/mmaped for
> > write, I can't really see the difference between local, remote and
> > clustered filesystems...
>
> Currently this is only possible locally, when both execution and opening
> for writing is performed on the same node. Then VFS enforces ETXTBSY.
> But if you do exec on one node and open for writing on another,
> VFSes on those nodes have no idea on what happens on all other nodes.
>
Thanks for the enlightement Oleg, I had assumed the owner of the file
to write over the executable while it's being executed... sort of
self-modifying code, but s/self/external/ ;)
Greetz, Antonio Vargas aka winden of network
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
