Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 24 Aug 1999 23:48:01 +0900
From:      "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@newsguy.com>
To:        Chuck Robey <chuckr@picnic.mat.net>
Cc:        FreeBSD Hackers <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   Re: Mandatory locking?
Message-ID:  <37C2B0A1.4E823BF9@newsguy.com>
References:  <Pine.BSF.4.10.9908232313540.49952-100000@picnic.mat.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Chuck Robey wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Christopher Masto wrote:
> 
> > Bleah.. I can't count the number of times I've seen idiotic code like:
> >
> > open file
> > read data
> > close file
> > open file for write
> > write data
> > close file
> >
> > Mandatory locking of the type above doesn't force such a thing to work.
> 
> What has that code you show above got to do with mandatory locking?
> You completely missed the explicit locking calls that you have to make,
> to get and release the locks.  If you don't make the call, and you have
> madatory locking, then your process will sleep until someone else
> releases the lock; if you only have advisory locking, and you use the
> miscreant code you show, then indeed things will go awry.

You missed the point. Insert the appropriate locking&unlocking at
each open/close operation. See? :-)

--
Daniel C. Sobral			(8-DCS)
dcs@newsguy.com
dcs@freebsd.org

	- Come on.
	- Where are we going?
	- To get what you came for.
	- What's that?
	- Me.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?37C2B0A1.4E823BF9>