IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
Point out in the API that "backend" talloc_moves into the watched
database.
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Autobuild-User(master): Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Fri Aug 17 21:29:15 CEST 2018 on sn-devel-144
Fix a confusing API: Many places TALLOC_FREE the path where it's not
clear you have to do it.
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andreas Schneider <asn@samba.org>
While chasing a bug in g_lock (not in master) I saw some opportunity to
simplify g_lock_trylock a bit. This is array handling, and array
handling is just extremely error-prone. This *might* be a little less
efficient or large numbers of READ locks, but this remains to be
seen. For now, simplify the code.
First, we make two passes now: One to remove ourselves, and the other
one to search for conflicts. Mixing up both made it pretty hard for me
to follow the code.
Second, I've removed the _mylock and mylock pointer/struct logic and
replaced it with the "mylock.pid.pid != 0 ? &mylock : NULL" when calling
g_lock_store. To me, this focuses the logic whether to add ourselves in
one place instead of spreading it around in the whole routine.
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Autobuild-User(master): Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Tue Aug 14 11:42:10 CEST 2018 on sn-devel-144
If we try to G_LOCK_READ while a G_LOCK_WRITE is active, we do the
serverid_exists call twice. Avoid that.
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
tevent_req_set_endtime internally already calls tevent_req_nomem and thus sets
the error status correctly.
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Ralph Boehme <slow@samba.org>
Autobuild-User(master): Ralph Böhme <slow@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Thu Feb 8 14:50:49 CET 2018 on sn-devel-144
g_lock_trylock() always incremented the counter 'i', even after cleaning a stale
entry at position 'i', which means it skipped checking for a conflict against
the new entry at position 'i'.
As result a process could get a write lock, while there're still
some read lock holders. Once we get into that problem, also more than
one write lock are possible.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13195
Signed-off-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Autobuild-User(master): Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Wed Dec 20 20:31:48 CET 2017 on sn-devel-144
Signed-off-by: Andreas Schneider <asn@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Autobuild-User(master): Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Sun Dec 10 00:46:26 CET 2017 on sn-devel-144
The initial idea was to have some "atomicity" in this API. Every
caller interested in a record would have to do something with
it once it changes. However, only one caller really used this
feature, and that is easily changed to not use it. So
remove the complexity.
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Ralph Boehme <slow@samba.org>
Enable handing the g_lock.tdb content without having to talloc
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Ralph Boehme <slow@samba.org>
xattr_tdb needs g_lock in a clustered environment. Nobody else
uses LOCK_ORDER_3 at this moment, so this looks safe.
The last one to use this was dbwrap_watch.tdb, and that's gone. The only
other one was notify_index.tdb, and that's gone too.
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
To be honest, it did not really make sense to just pass in
lock holders individually. You could argue that it made sense
with in reality only G_LOCK_WRITE around, but soon we will have
G_LOCK_READ and thus multiple lock holders on a single lock.
Now that we also have userdata, change the g_lock_dump API
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Sequel to the previous commit changing the get/put routines for
the on-disk format
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
The next patches will make g_locks carry data. This
prepares the on-disk format.
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
No code change, just shuffling around:
Before this patchset, g_lock_parse was somewhere in the middle. This carries no
real logic, put it on top.
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Typicall, when we watch a record, we wait for a process to give up some
resource. Be it an oplock, a share mode or the g_lock. If everything goes well,
the blocker sends us a message. If the blocker dies hard, we want to also be
informed immediately.
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Ira Cooper <ira@samba.org>
Autobuild-User(master): Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Sun Mar 6 19:34:42 CET 2016 on sn-devel-144
