[pulseaudio-discuss] Making locking nicer for NFS
arun.raghavan at collabora.co.uk
Mon Apr 2 23:20:52 PDT 2012
On Tue, 2012-04-03 at 07:54 +0200, David Henningsson wrote:
> On 04/03/2012 06:27 AM, Arun Raghavan wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-08-25 at 10:37 -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> >> This method also has the advantage of not relying on lock promotion
> >> semantics, which (apparently) will make the Windoze version easier.
> >> Thomas
> >> On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 10:30 AM, David Henningsson
> >> <david.henningsson at canonical.com> wrote:
> >> On 08/21/2011 04:38 PM, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> >> Whoops. They need to repeat the read after obtaining
> >> the write lock and
> >> only update the file if the contents are still bad in
> >> that case.
> >> Would a good handling of this be:
> >> 1) Open the cookie read-only
> >> 2) read the cookie
> >> 3) close file
> >> 4) if we have a correct cookie, do nothing more
> >> 5) if we have the wrong cookie, do the old handling unchanged:
> >> open with write lock, check the contents (again), and write if
> >> something is (still) wrong.
> > Thomas, David: Any news on this? Looks like we're agreed on an approach
> > and this "just" needs to be implemented now. :)
> As I understand it, Thomas problem was solved somehow (see
> ), and thus nobody did anything.
> In the long term, maybe the cookie should move to XDG_RUNTIME_DIR ,
> which I understand would normally reside on a tmpfs, where this is not
> an issue in the first place.
D'oh! Makes sense. Filed a bug so we can get to it post 2.0:
More information about the pulseaudio-discuss