[1003.1(2013)/Issue7+TC1 0000768]: add "fd-private" POSIX locks to spec

[Austin Group Bug Tracker]

A NOTE has been added to this issue.
======================================================================
http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=768
======================================================================
Reported By: jlayton
Assigned To:
======================================================================
Project: 1003.1(2013)/Issue7+TC1
Issue ID: 768
Category: System Interfaces
Type: Enhancement Request
Severity: Editorial
Priority: normal
Status: New
Name: Jeff Layton
Organization: Red Hat
User Reference:
Section: fcntl
Page Number: 814-815
Line Number:
Interp Status: ---
Final Accepted Text:
======================================================================
Date Submitted: 2013-10-11 13:24 UTC
Last Modified: 2014-04-18 00:01 UTC
======================================================================
Summary: add "fd-private" POSIX locks to spec
======================================================================
Relationships ID Summary
----------------------------------------------------------------------
related to 0000824 children should not inherit fcntl file ...
======================================================================

----------------------------------------------------------------------
(0002230) jlayton (reporter) - 2014-04-18 00:01
http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=768#c2230
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is currently a discussion running on several Linux-related mailing
lists about what we should call these new locks. The original name I game
them was "file-private" locks but that's not as descriptive as it should
be.

The current favorite is "file-description locks" since these follow the
open file description, with a corresponding change of the macros to make
them more visually distinct:

F_FD_GETLK
F_FD_SETLK
F_FD_SETLKW

...it would be nice to have some input on this front from the "powers that
be" at the austingroup. A link to the discussion on LKML is here:

https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/4/16/583

Please feel free to chime in on the discussion if you can. Unfortunately,
the window to rename these is rather short. We only have around 6 weeks
before v3.15 of the kernel ships with this feature, and I need to have this
fixed well before then.

Issue History
Date Modified Username Field Change
======================================================================
2013-10-11 13:24 jlayton New Issue
2013-10-11 13:24 jlayton Name => Jeff Layton
2013-10-11 13:24 jlayton Organization => Red Hat
2013-10-11 13:24 jlayton Section => fcntl
2013-10-11 13:24 jlayton Page Number => 814-815
2013-10-11 13:39 jlayton Issue Monitored: jlayton
2013-10-11 15:27 jilles Note Added: 0001879
2013-10-11 15:45 jlayton Note Added: 0001880
2013-11-08 12:18 jlayton Note Added: 0001975
2013-11-14 16:17 Don Cragun Note Added: 0001985
2013-11-27 17:44 grawity Issue Monitored: grawity
2013-12-04 11:06 Florian Weimer Issue Monitored: Florian Weimer

2013-12-10 19:59 jlayton Note Added: 0002062
2013-12-12 12:05 jlayton Note Added: 0002069
2013-12-26 12:29 jlayton Note Added: 0002093
2014-02-27 16:20 eblake Note Added: 0002163
2014-02-27 16:22 eblake Relationship added related to 0000824
2014-02-27 18:44 jlayton Note Added: 0002168
2014-04-18 00:01 jlayton Note Added: 0002230
======================================================================