> Currently it tracks O_EXCL on open() and sets a flag, whereby no other
> open() calls can succeed. Is this functionality really needed? Perhaps it
> should just be a reader/writer model : n readers or 1 writer. In that
> case, should open() block on a writer, or return -EBUSY?
Several tools
Tim Hockin wrote:
> Who is maintaining the /dev/nvram driver? I have a couple things I want to
> suggest/ask.
I haven't seen any patches for ages to nvram, so I presume nobody.
> What I really want to know is: should I bother making nvram_open_cnt SMP
> safe, or should it just go away all
Tim Hockin wrote:
Who is maintaining the /dev/nvram driver? I have a couple things I want to
suggest/ask.
I haven't seen any patches for ages to nvram, so I presume nobody.
What I really want to know is: should I bother making nvram_open_cnt SMP
safe, or should it just go away all
Currently it tracks O_EXCL on open() and sets a flag, whereby no other
open() calls can succeed. Is this functionality really needed? Perhaps it
should just be a reader/writer model : n readers or 1 writer. In that
case, should open() block on a writer, or return -EBUSY?
Several tools
4 matches
Mail list logo
