Re: [PATCH] Add process name to locks warning

[Andi Kleen]

On 11/18/2022 6:06 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Fri, 2022-11-18 at 15:43 -0800, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > It's fairly useless to complain about using an obsolete feature without
> > telling the user which process used it. My Fedora desktop randomly drops
> > this message, but I would really need this patch to figure out what
> > triggers is.
> Interesting. The only program I know of that tried to use these was
> samba, but we patched that out a few years ago (about the time this
> patch went in). Are you running an older version of samba?


Yes it's running samba, whatever is in Fedora 35. Don't know if that 
counts as an

older version.


> > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   fs/locks.c | 2 +-
> >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
> > index 607f94a0e789..2e45232dbeb1 100644
> > --- a/fs/locks.c
> > +++ b/fs/locks.c
> > @@ -2096,7 +2096,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(flock, unsigned int, fd, unsigned int, cmd)
> >   	 * throw a warning to let people know that they don't actually work.
> >   	 */
> >   	if (cmd & LOCK_MAND) {
> > -		pr_warn_once("Attempt to set a LOCK_MAND lock via flock(2). This support has been removed and the request ignored.\n");
> > +		pr_warn_once("%s: Attempt to set a LOCK_MAND lock via flock(2). This support has been removed and the request ignored.\n", current->comm);
> >   		return 0;
> >   	}
> >   
> Looks reasonable. Would it help to print the pid or tgid as well?

It wouldn't help me because at that time I see it it's likely long gone. 
Just need the name.