Re: [PATCH v4 15/15] fanotify: report FAN_ONDIR to listener with FAN_REPORT_FID

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri 04-01-19 13:42:33, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 12:57 PM Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > @@ -145,12 +146,38 @@ static u32 fanotify_group_event_mask(struct fsnotify_group *group,
> > >               marks_ignored_mask |= mark->ignored_mask;
> > >       }
> > >
> > > +     test_mask = event_mask & marks_mask & ~marks_ignored_mask;
> > > +
> > > +     /*
> > > +      * dirent modification events (create/delete/move) do not carry the
> > > +      * child entry name/inode information. Instead, we report FAN_ONDIR
> > > +      * for mkdir/rmdir so user can differentiate them from creat/unlink.
> > > +      *
> > > +      * For backward compatibility and consistency, do not report FAN_ONDIR
> > > +      * to user in legacy fanotify mode (reporting fd) and report FAN_ONDIR
> > > +      * to user in FAN_REPORT_FID mode for all event types.
> > > +      */
> > > +     if (FAN_GROUP_FLAG(group, FAN_REPORT_FID)) {
> > > +             /* Do not report FAN_ONDIR without an event type */
> > > +             BUILD_BUG_ON(FANOTIFY_EVENT_TYPES & FANOTIFY_EVENT_FLAGS);
> > > +             if (!(test_mask & FANOTIFY_EVENT_TYPES))
> > > +                     return 0;
> > > +
> > > +             user_mask |= FAN_ONDIR;
> > > +     }
> > > +
> > > +     /*
> > > +      * Unlike legacy fanotify events (open/access/close), dirent events
> > > +      * for subdir entries (mkdir/rmdir) will be reported regardless if
> > > +      * user requested FAN_ONDIR, but the FAN_ONDIR flag itself will only
> > > +      * be reported if the user asked for it.
> > > +      */
> > >       if (event_mask & FS_ISDIR &&
> > > +         !(event_mask & ALL_FSNOTIFY_DIRENT_EVENTS) &&
> >
> > I disagree with this. It just seems inconsistent for dirent events for
> > directories to get reported without FAN_ONDIR. I understand there's not
> > great use for not reporting directory dirent events but it's not like
> > adding FAN_ONDIR to the mark mask is that big deal for userspace. And it
> > makes the API more consistent. You could possibly remind the reader in the
> > manpage that FAN_ONDIR is required to get all dirent events.
> 
> I see your point.
> I have no problem with requiring FAN_ONDIR for mkdir events.
> I believe the strongest argument should be which way is easier
> to document/understand.
> 
> Matthew, if you agree that it looks easier to document Jan's proposal,
> please go a head with this and we will see how man page looks like
> before making the final decision.

Agreed.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux