[PATCH v4 12/13] locks: report l_pid as -1 for FL_FILE_PVT locks

[Jeff Layton]

FL_FILE_PVT locks are no longer tied to a particular pid, and are
instead inheritable by child processes. Report a l_pid of '-1' for
these sorts of locks since the pid is somewhat meaningless for them.

This precedent comes from FreeBSD. There, POSIX and flock() locks can
conflict with one another. If fcntl(F_GETLK, ...) returns a lock set
with flock() then the l_pid member cannot be a process ID because the
lock is not held by a process as such.

Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
 fs/locks.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
index 995583b..013b177 100644
--- a/fs/locks.c
+++ b/fs/locks.c
@@ -1863,7 +1863,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vfs_test_lock);
 
 static int posix_lock_to_flock(struct flock *flock, struct file_lock *fl)
 {
-	flock->l_pid = fl->fl_pid;
+	flock->l_pid = IS_FILE_PVT(fl) ? -1 : fl->fl_pid;
 #if BITS_PER_LONG == 32
 	/*
 	 * Make sure we can represent the posix lock via
@@ -1885,7 +1885,7 @@ static int posix_lock_to_flock(struct flock *flock, struct file_lock *fl)
 #if BITS_PER_LONG == 32
 static void posix_lock_to_flock64(struct flock64 *flock, struct file_lock *fl)
 {
-	flock->l_pid = fl->fl_pid;
+	flock->l_pid = IS_FILE_PVT(fl) ? -1 : fl->fl_pid;
 	flock->l_start = fl->fl_start;
 	flock->l_len = fl->fl_end == OFFSET_MAX ? 0 :
 		fl->fl_end - fl->fl_start + 1;
-- 
1.8.4.2

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