From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <775b8d190610310644w822038frdc204969ed924ea@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed,  1 Nov 2006 01:44:47 +1100
From: "Bruce Ellis" <bruce.ellis@gmail.com>
To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] 9P and locking
In-Reply-To: <45476014.2080506@free.fr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <3190d0e50610250505j723f392fp319da7ff20adc313@mail.gmail.com>
	<3190d0e50610310625s6a571ca3ne7150d46a86ac297@mail.gmail.com>
	<45476014.2080506@free.fr>
Topicbox-Message-UUID: d9548e0a-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

yes, but that is not the locking that one may desire.
simplistic and effective but not a panacea.

brucee

On 11/1/06, Anel Philippe <xigh@free.fr> wrote:
> Locking is implemented through DMEXCL bit. See open(2).
>
>    Phil;
>
> Alejo Sanchez a =E9crit :
> > Hi guys.
> >
> > I'm doing a minimal user space 9P implementation for a special
> > distributed network storage. One of the features missing on the 9P
> > protocol is file locking. Do you know why it was kept outside? Or am I
> > missing something?
> >
> > So far my plan to extend is to have messages mimicking fcntl, but
> > maybe that's not the best way to get it done. Did anyone work on
> > locking and would like to share their experience or opinion?
> >
> > Cheers.
> >
> > Alejo
> >
> >
>
>