-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote: | --On Monday, April 07, 2008 05:44:38 PM -0400 Matt Benjamin | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | |> | The existing model works today but suffers from the failure to know |> that |> | the reason a callback was received was because the lock was dropped or |> | because a Store occurred etc. |> |> I believe there is a race between A (who received EWOULDBLOCK, and has |> decided to re-try) and B, who requests an overlapping lock, in the |> interval between C's release of the contended lock (3) and A's |> re-execution of its lock request (1). | | I know of no race condition in the current locking model. In the | situation you describe, one of A or B will get EWOULDBLOCK, because the | fileserver will not allow both overlapping conflicting locks to | succeed. There certainly is an unfairness, which is not the same thing. | | -- Jeff
Well, unfairness then. In POSIX, the lock belongs to A, I believe. Matt - -- Matt Benjamin The Linux Box 206 South Fifth Ave. Suite 150 Ann Arbor, MI 48104 http://linuxbox.com tel. 734-761-4689 fax. 734-769-8938 cel. 734-216-5309 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFH+pqfJiSUUSaRdSURCCIsAJ9btf/dlkezbI1MJ9vd7jpZKCIehwCggR1f GlH1gsSg09Mc9Ohb44Yy+cM= =LLmd -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ AFS3-standardization mailing list [email protected] http://michigan-openafs-lists.central.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization
