On Sat, Jan 05, 2019 at 09:59:42AM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: > ... > > > > > + /* > > > > > + * 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. > > > > To be fair, for the sake of clarity and consistency with the existing API I do > > believe it would make it easier for the API consumer to comprehend what Jan has > > suggested. Simple, in order to receive any events of type dirent, one must > > supply FAN_ONDIR as part of their mark mask. > > > > But that was not the suggestion. > > The debate is whether or not user needs to specify (for example) > FAN_ONDIR|FAN_CREATE in order to get mkdir events. And I'm agreeing with the fact that I think this ^ i.e. FAN_ONDIR | FAN_CREATE is the way to go moving forward. However, there is still a small part of me that thinks doing it this way seems a little weird and solely supplying FAN_CREATE for example should be sufficient in order to get these type of dirent events. I don't know why, but for whatever reason I have a feeling of uncertainty about this. > The three of us understanding FAN_ONDIR intuitively different is what makes > me unease. > > The purpose of my alternative suggestion was to dis-disambiguate which inode > each flag refers to. > > It should be clear that FAN_DIRENT_ISDIR does not refer to the modified > directry but to the created/deleted/renamed subdir. > We will avoid making a change of behavior making FAN_ONDIR an out flag. Yeah, so maybe using FAN_DIRENT_ISDIR is indeed the solution. I don't really have any objections with it at this particular point. Let's see whether Jan has looked at it from a different perspective and can share his opinion. -- Matthew Bobrowski
