fuse: fix flock

Commit a9ff4f87 "fuse: support BSD locking semantics" overlooked a
number of issues with supporing flock locks over existing POSIX
locking infrastructure:

  - it's not backward compatible, passing flock(2) calls to userspace
    unconditionally (if userspace sets FUSE_POSIX_LOCKS)

  - it doesn't cater for the fact that flock locks are automatically
    unlocked on file release

  - it doesn't take into account the fact that flock exclusive locks
    (write locks) don't need an fd opened for write.

The last one invalidates the original premise of the patch that flock
locks can be emulated with POSIX locks.

This patch fixes the first two issues.  The last one needs to be fixed
in userspace if the filesystem assumed that a write lock will happen
only on a file operned for write (as in the case of the current fuse
library).

Reported-by: Sebastian Pipping <webmaster@hartwork.org>
Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>

1 files changed, 7 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/fs/fuse/fuse_i.h b/fs/fuse/fuse_i.h
index b788becada76..eb8c6135fbbf 100644
--- a/fs/fuse/fuse_i.h
+++ b/fs/fuse/fuse_i.h
@@ -135,6 +135,9 @@ struct fuse_file {
 
 	/** Wait queue head for poll */
 	wait_queue_head_t poll_wait;
+
+	/** Has flock been performed on this file? */
+	bool flock:1;
 };
 
 /** One input argument of a request */
@@ -448,7 +451,7 @@ struct fuse_conn {
 	/** Is removexattr not implemented by fs? */
 	unsigned no_removexattr:1;
 
-	/** Are file locking primitives not implemented by fs? */
+	/** Are posix file locking primitives not implemented by fs? */
 	unsigned no_lock:1;
 
 	/** Is access not implemented by fs? */
@@ -472,6 +475,9 @@ struct fuse_conn {
 	/** Don't apply umask to creation modes */
 	unsigned dont_mask:1;
 
+	/** Are BSD file locking primitives not implemented by fs? */
+	unsigned no_flock:1;
+
 	/** The number of requests waiting for completion */
 	atomic_t num_waiting;