On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 10:42:36PM +0000, Sami Kerola wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH] lslocks: print waiting state when necessary
> Organization: Lastminute.com
>
> Earlier output was primarily unexpected.
>
> $ flock foo -c "sleep 100" & flock foo -c "sleep 100" & flock foo -c
> "sleep 100" & lslocks
> [1] 22352
> [2] 22353
> [3] 22354
> lslocks: failed to parse pid: 'WRITE'
>
> This commit adds WAITING mode to output listing. The locks which failed
> with earlier version will look the following.
>
> COMMAND PID TYPE SIZE MODE M START END PATH
> [...]
> flock 22354 FLOCK 0B WAITING 0 0 0
> /home/src/util-linux/foo
> flock 22352 FLOCK 0B WAITING 0 0 0
> /home/src/util-linux/foo
> flock 22353 FLOCK 0B WRITE 0 0 0
> /home/src/util-linux/foo
It's probably good idea to add information that the process is blocked,
but I don't think that use WAITING in the MODE column is the right way.
We will lost the original information about the lock mode.
It would be better to add a new column (e.g. BLOCKED).
We can also add a prefix to MODE, for example ">WRITE" for blocked
process. The disadvantage is that ">WRITE" is not backwardly compatible.
(Hmm.. lslocks was introduced in release 2.22 and it's broken now ...
maybe it's not so big problem ;-)
It would be also nice to have --blocked command line option to list
blocked processes only.
Karel
--
Karel Zak <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx>
http://karelzak.blogspot.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
