On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 09:41:06AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> >Why can't O_EXCL mean that the kernel prevents anyone else from issuing
> >ioctl's to the device? One would think that is the meaning of exlusive.
> >That way when the burning program opens the device with O_EXCL, no one
> >else can screw it up while it is open. If it happens to be polled by
> >hal when the burning program tries to open it, it can just wait and
> >retry again until it gets it open.
>
> Such use of O_EXCL is a weird and non-standard behavior.
So what method exists for opening a file/device an guaranteeing that
nothing else can do anything to it?
Looking an man 2 open, I can't even see any way O_EXCL even has a normal
meaning for a device, so how much more "weird and non-standard" would it
be to have it control exclusive access to a device? It appears it is
only supposed to have a meaning for creating files.
--
Len Sorensen
-
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]
