[PATCH] locks: export device name

February 10th, 2012 - 04:10 pm ET by Davidlohr Bueso | Report spam
From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@gnu.org>

The lslk(8) program has not been maintained for over a decade and has recently been rewritten as lslocks(8).
It will be available for the next 2.22 release, in a couple of months. This is a good opportunity to delete
that nasty WE_CAN_BREAK_LSLK_NOW and start exporting the device name instead of the maj:min numbers.

For backward compatibility the new version can be in charge of checking older kernel versions and parsing the old
output if necessary.

Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@gnu.org>

fs/locks.c | 7 -
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
index 637694b..2b01907 100644
a/fs/locks.c
+++ b/fs/locks.c
@@ -2199,15 +2199,8 @@ static void lock_get_status(struct seq_file *f, struct file_lock *fl,
: (fl->fl_type & F_WRLCK) ? "WRITE" : "READ ");
}
if (inode) {
-#ifdef WE_CAN_BREAK_LSLK_NOW
seq_printf(f, "%d %s:%ld ", fl_pid,
inode->i_sb->s_id, inode->i_ino);
-#else
- /* userspace relies on this representation of dev_t ;-( */
- seq_printf(f, "%d %02x:%02x:%ld ", fl_pid,
- MAJOR(inode->i_sb->s_dev),
- MINOR(inode->i_sb->s_dev), inode->i_ino);
-#endif
} else {
seq_printf(f, "%d <none>:0 ", fl_pid);
}
1.7.4.1



To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
email Follow the discussionReplies 7 repliesReplies Make a reply

Replies

#1 Andrew Morton
February 13th, 2012 - 07:40 pm ET | Report spam
On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 22:06:07 +0100
Davidlohr Bueso wrote:

From: Davidlohr Bueso

The lslk(8) program has not been maintained for over a decade and has recently been rewritten as lslocks(8).
It will be available for the next 2.22 release, in a couple of months. This is a good opportunity to delete
that nasty WE_CAN_BREAK_LSLK_NOW and start exporting the device name instead of the maj:min numbers.

For backward compatibility the new version can be in charge of checking older kernel versions and parsing the old
output if necessary.

...

a/fs/locks.c
+++ b/fs/locks.c
@@ -2199,15 +2199,8 @@ static void lock_get_status(struct seq_file *f, struct file_lock *fl,
: (fl->fl_type & F_WRLCK) ? "WRITE" : "READ ");
}
if (inode) {
-#ifdef WE_CAN_BREAK_LSLK_NOW
seq_printf(f, "%d %s:%ld ", fl_pid,
inode->i_sb->s_id, inode->i_ino);
-#else
- /* userspace relies on this representation of dev_t ;-( */
- seq_printf(f, "%d %02x:%02x:%ld ", fl_pid,
- MAJOR(inode->i_sb->s_dev),
- MINOR(inode->i_sb->s_dev), inode->i_ino);
-#endif
} else {
seq_printf(f, "%d <none>:0 ", fl_pid);
}



I don't get it. This is an immediate and non-back-compatible change to
the format of /proc/locks. The only way this can avoid breaking things
is if there are no programs or scripts in use by anyone which use
this field. What am I missing here?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Similar topics