From owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Feb 12 00:00:02 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@smarthost.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C249FAE7
 for <freebsd-bugs@smarthost.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Tue, 12 Feb 2013 00:00:02 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B212980F
 for <freebsd-bugs@smarthost.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Tue, 12 Feb 2013 00:00:02 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.6/8.14.6) with ESMTP id r1C001wh027117
 for <freebsd-bugs@freefall.freebsd.org>; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 00:00:01 GMT
 (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org)
Received: (from gnats@localhost)
 by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.6/8.14.6/Submit) id r1C001YO027113;
 Tue, 12 Feb 2013 00:00:01 GMT (envelope-from gnats)
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 00:00:01 GMT
Message-Id: <201302120000.r1C001YO027113@freefall.freebsd.org>
To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Cc: 
From: Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@stack.nl>
Subject: Re: kern/175674: sem_open() should use O_EXLOCK with open() instead
 of a separate flock() call
X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@stack.nl>
List-Id: Bug reports <freebsd-bugs.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-bugs>,
 <mailto:freebsd-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-bugs>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-bugs>,
 <mailto:freebsd-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 00:00:02 -0000

The following reply was made to PR kern/175674; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@stack.nl>
To: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@FreeBSD.org>
Cc: Jukka Ukkonen <jau@iki.fi>, freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org,
	davidxu@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: kern/175674: sem_open() should use O_EXLOCK with open() instead
 of a separate flock() call
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 00:56:42 +0100

 On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 09:49:55PM +0100, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
 > On 2013-02-03 21:20, Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@stack.nl> wrote:
 > > For a reason unknown to me, open(2) does not restart but always
 > > returns [EINTR] when a signal is caught. This is not POSIX-compliant.
 > > On the other hand, flock(2) is not broken in this way. So this change
 > > breaks sem_open(3) in the unlikely case that a signal with SA_RESTART
 > > arrives while it is waiting for the lock.
 
 > I see where kern_openat() returns an error when vn_open is interrupted:
 
 > 1083         error = vn_open(&nd, &flags, cmode, fp);
 > 1084         if (error) {
 > ....
 > 1109                 if (error == ERESTART)
 > 1110                         error = EINTR;
 > 1111                 goto bad;
 > 1112         }
 
 > > The best way to fix this is in kern_openat() in the kernel but this
 > > might cause compatibility issues.
 
 > Not sure if there would be serious compatibility problems if open()
 > would automatically restart instead of returning EINTR.  It definitely
 > seems a rather intrusive change though.
 
 As of r246472, open() is now sufficiently fixed that O_EXLOCK can be
 used.
 
 Although it is not a problem if a different thread than the file creator
 initializes the semaphore, the change reduces system calls and code
 size.
 
 On another note, the flock(fd, LOCK_UN) calls can go away because they
 are implicit in the close(fd).
 
 -- 
 Jilles Tjoelker