> Amir, I was just thinking about this a little over the weekend and I > don't think we discussed how to handle the FAN_REPORT_PIDFD | > FAN_REPORT_FID and friends case? My immediate thought is to make > FAN_REPORT_PIDFD mutually exclusive with FAN_REPORT_FID and friends, > but then again receiving a pidfd along with FID events may be also > useful for some? What are your thoughts on this? If we don't go ahead > with mutual exclusion, then this multiple event types alongside struct > fanotify_event_metadata starts getting a little clunky, don't you > think? > The current format of an fanotify event already supports multiple info records: [fanotify_event_metadata] [[fanotify_event_info_header][event record #1]] [[fanotify_event_info_header][event record #2]]... (meta)->event_len is the total event length including all info records. For example, FAN_REPORT_FID | FAN_REPORT_DFID_MAME produces (for some events) two info records, one FAN_EVENT_INFO_TYPE_FID record and one FAN_EVENT_INFO_TYPE_DFID_NAME record. So I see no problem with combination of FAN_REPORT_FID and FAN_REPORT_PIDFD. Thanks, Amir.
