On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Karel Zak <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 01:23:21AM +0200, Mantas Mikulėnas wrote:
>> On 2013-02-12 00:42, Sami Kerola wrote:
>> > Karel, and others, what do you think about adding a mode
>> > to output listing which some might say is not a mode at all?
>>
>> Just tested the patch and it works here, but wouldn't it be better to
>> add a "waiting" flag to the mode display, or something like that?
>> ("WAIT-READ" and "WAIT-WRITE"?)
>>
>>
>>
>> Side note: It seems that fs/locks.c:lock_get_status can output many
>> other variations – e.g. mandatory locks have a third type called
>> "ACCESS", shown when a program tries to simply read/write a locked file;
>> in this case listing the R/W mode might be more useful than "WAITING".
>> Mandatory locks can apparently say "RW" as well, although I haven't
>> found a way to create a "RW" lock yet.
>
> Yes, IMHO we have to follow kernel and keep the original string in
> the MODE column.
Perhaps the columns lslocks displays by default should not be changed.
For the blocked locks adding a small markup to MODE field such as ">"
prefix makes sense to me, as it gives a hint to use there is
information in BLOCKED column.
>> Also, while I haven't yet seen this in practice either, the same
>> fs/locks.c can output lock type "LEASE", which has completely different
>> values for the 3rd field, and cannot be represented by a binary
>> "M[andatory] = 0/1" column.
>
> Good point. This should be fixed. I think that lease locks could be
> also interpreted as mandatory (so "1" should be used in "M" column).
>
> But you're right that we need something more to describe lease locks
> -- probably by another column "PROCMODE" (process mode) and use
> keywords BREAKING, ACTIVE and BREAKER from kernel.
>
> Maybe we can use the same column to identify blocked flock/posix
> processes (by BLOCKED keyword) as I described in my previous email.
I quite like the BLOCKED column, especially when it tells what/who is blocking.
Almost off topic.
I noticed another small lslocks annoyance. With narrow window 'lslocks
| cat' is truncating lines. IMHO when writing to pipe command should
ignore window width.
--
Sami Kerola
http://www.iki.fi/kerolasa/
--
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
