On Sat, Aug 21, 2021 at 08:45:54AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > On Fri, 2021-08-20 at 17:29 -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > > No, Windows has deny-mode locking at open time, but the kernel's > > mandatory locks are enforced during read/write (which is why they are > > such a pain). Samba will not miss these at all. > > > > If we want something to provide windows-like semantics, we'd probably > > want to start with something like Pavel Shilovsky's O_DENY_* patches. > > > > -- Jeff > > > > Doh! It completely slipped my mind about byte-range locks on windows... > > Those are mandatory and they do block read and write activity to the > ranges locked. They have weird semantics vs. POSIX locks (they stack > instead of splitting/merging, etc.). > > Samba emulates these with (advisory) POSIX locks in most cases. Using > mandatory locks is probably possible, but I think it would add more > potential for deadlock and security issues. Right, so Windows byte-range locks are different from Windows open deny modes. But even if somebody wanted to implement them, I doubt they'd start with the mandatory locking code you're removing here, so I think they're irrelevant to this discussion. --b.
