LGTM

On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 11:24 AM, John Admanski <[email protected]> wrote:
> Use flock, not lockf, for locking in base_job. lockf doesn't work very well
> when the actual length and contents of the file are in flux, since we're
> really just trying to use the file as one big cross-process semaphore.
>
> Signed-off-by: John Admanski <[email protected]>
>
> --- autotest/client/common_lib/base_job.py      2010-01-21 15:14:24.000000000 
> -0800
> +++ autotest/client/common_lib/base_job.py      2010-01-29 11:22:50.000000000 
> -0800
> @@ -189,13 +189,13 @@
>         """Acquire a lock on the backing file."""
>         if self._backing_file:
>             self._backing_file_lock = open(self._backing_file, 'a')
> -            fcntl.lockf(self._backing_file_lock, fcntl.LOCK_EX)
> +            fcntl.flock(self._backing_file_lock, fcntl.LOCK_EX)
>
>
>     def _unlock_backing_file(self):
>         """Release a lock on the backing file."""
>         if self._backing_file_lock:
> -            fcntl.lockf(self._backing_file_lock, fcntl.LOCK_UN)
> +            fcntl.flock(self._backing_file_lock, fcntl.LOCK_UN)
>             self._backing_file_lock.close()
>             self._backing_file_lock = None
> _______________________________________________
> Autotest mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://test.kernel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/autotest
>
_______________________________________________
Autotest mailing list
[email protected]
http://test.kernel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/autotest

Reply via email to