On Wed, 2006-02-22 at 14:57 -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 06:32:31PM -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > Hmm... I don't think you want to overload write deny bits onto
> > FMODE_EXEC. FMODE_EXEC is basically, a read-only mode, so it
> > would mean that you could no longer do something like
> >
> > OPEN(READ|WRITE,DENY_WRITE)
> >
> > which I would assume is one of the more frequent Windoze open modes.
>
> Since exec will never use the above combination, I don't think the
> current proposal mandates any particular semantics in that case.
>
> So I'm assuming that we could choose the semantics to fit nfsd's
> purposes. Am I missing anything?
Yes. I'm saying that your mapping of the NFSv4 DENY_WRITE share mode
into FMODE_EXEC will _only_ work for the specific combination
OPEN(READ,DENY_WRITE).
Basically, your proposal makes heavy assumptions on what clients will
want to use the share modes for, and will misbehave badly for any client
that breaks those assumptions.
Cheers,
Trond
-
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]
