Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 18:08:40 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: thorpej@nas.nasa.gov Cc: tlambert@primenet.com, dk+@ua.net, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Possible SERIOUS bug in open()? Message-ID: <199710231808.LAA28324@usr02.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <199710231756.KAA04569@lestat.nas.nasa.gov> from "Jason Thorpe" at Oct 23, 97 10:56:17 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > I need to hold a reference. The "lock against eject" operation is > > a side effect of an existing reference forcing the count over 1 for > > the device in question. > > > > So the short answer is "to obtain reference side effects without > > granting read/write access on the descriptor". > > I think "open for not read not write" is a silly way to do this, personally. > > If you want to add/delete "artificial references", then invent a real > interface for it, don't use a hack like open with non-sensical flags. By this logic, locking should be implemented via a system call instead of a hack like fcntl(). 8-(. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199710231808.LAA28324>