On Thu 16-07-20 20:20:04, Amir Goldstein wrote: > On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 8:01 PM Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Thu 16-07-20 11:42:23, Amir Goldstein wrote: > > > Similar to events "on child" to watching directory, send event "on child" > > > with parent/name info if sb/mount/non-dir marks are interested in > > > parent/name info. > > > > > > The FS_EVENT_ON_CHILD flag can be set on sb/mount/non-dir marks to specify > > > interest in parent/name info for events on non-directory inodes. > > > > > > Events on "orphan" children (disconnected dentries) are sent without > > > parent/name info. > > > > > > Events on direcories are send with parent/name info only if the parent > > > directory is watching. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Hum, doesn't this break ignore mask handling in > > fanotify_group_event_mask()? Because parent's ignore mask will be included > > even though parent is added into the iter only to carry the parent info... > > > > Hmm, break ignore mask handling? or fix it? > > Man page said: > "Having these two types of masks permits a mount point or directory to be > marked for receiving events, while at the same time ignoring events for > specific objects under that mount point or directory." Right, but presumably that speaks of the case of a mark where the parent has FS_EVENT_ON_CHILD set. For case of parent watching events of a child, I agree it makes sense to apply ignore masks of both the parent and the child. > The author did not say what to expect from marking a mount and ignoring > a directory. Yes and I'd expect to apply ignore mask on events for that directory but not for events on files in that directory... Even more so because this will be currently inconsistent wrt whether the child is dir (parent's ignore mask does not apply) or file (parent's ignore mask does apply). > As it turns out, I need this exact functionality for my snapshot. > - sb is watching all (pre) modify events > - after dir has been marked with a change in snapshot an exclude > mark is set on that dir inode > - further modification events on files inside that dir are ignored > without calling event handler Yes, I can see how the functionality is useful. Maybe with FS_EVENT_ON_CHILD in the ignore mask, applying the mask to child's events would make sense... But that's IMO a dispute for a different patch. > I am sure you are aware that we have been fixing a lot of problems > in handling combinations of mark masks. Very well aware :) > I see the unified event as another step in the direction to fix those > issues and to get consistent and expected behavior. Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR
