Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 23 Jun 2023 23:48:25 +0300
From:      Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>
To:        Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org>
Cc:        FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Should close() release locks atomically?
Message-ID:  <ZJYFGa6oOVQxOqEk@kib.kiev.ua>
In-Reply-To: <CAOtMX2jRkyv%2Bs21%2Bdcx16GjiEuVrF_c_X=%2B5r02hMLTrwxZ=Pw@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <CAOtMX2jjKyj5JNkEXh7_UsEQLkuhpfmybht7gDwQR64BQzAXrQ@mail.gmail.com> <ZJX6c1LcDU97E7z8@kib.kiev.ua> <CAOtMX2jRkyv%2Bs21%2Bdcx16GjiEuVrF_c_X=%2B5r02hMLTrwxZ=Pw@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 01:11:34PM -0700, Alan Somers wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 1:03 PM Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 12:00:36PM -0700, Alan Somers wrote:
> > > The close() syscall automatically releases locks.  Should it do so
> > > atomically or is a delay permitted?  I can't find anything in our man
> > > pages or the open group specification that says.
> > >
> > > The distinction matters when using O_NONBLOCK.  For example:
> > >
> > > fd = open(..., O_DIRECT | O_EXLOCK | O_NONBLOCK); //succeeds
> > > // do some I/O
> > > close(fd);
> > > fd = open(..., O_DIRECT | O_EXLOCK | O_NONBLOCK); //fails with EAGAIN!
> > >
> > > I see this error frequently on a heavily loaded system.  It isn't a
> > > typical thread race though; ktrace shows that only one thread tries to
> > > open the file in question.  From the ktrace, I can see that the final
> > > open() comes immediately after the close(), with no intervening
> > > syscalls from that thread.  It seems that close() doesn't release the
> > > lock right away.  I wouldn't notice if I weren't using O_NONBLOCK.
> > >
> > > Should this be considered a bug?  If so I could try to come up with a
> > > minimal test case.  But it's somewhat academic, since I plan to
> > > refactor the code in a way that will eliminate the duplicate open().
> > What type of the object is behind fd?  O_NONBLOCK affects open itself.
> > We release flock after object close method, but before close(2) returns.
> 
> This is a plain file on ZFS.

Can you write a self-contained example, and check the same issue e.g. on
tmpfs?



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ZJYFGa6oOVQxOqEk>