On Mon 20-06-22 16:45:50, Amir Goldstein wrote: > Setting flags FAN_ONDIR FAN_EVENT_ON_CHILD in ignore mask has no effect. > The FAN_EVENT_ON_CHILD flag in mask implicitly applies to ignore mask and > ignore mask is always implicitly applied to events on directories. > > Define a mark flag that replaces this legacy behavior with logic of > applying the ignore mask according to event flags in ignore mask. > > Implement the new logic to prepare for supporting an ignore mask that > ignores events on children and ignore mask that does not ignore events > on directories. > > To emphasize the change in terminology, also rename ignored_mask mark > member to ignore_mask and use accessor to get only ignored events or > events and flags. > > This change in terminology finally aligns with the "ignore mask" > language in man pages and in most of the comments. > > Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> .. > @@ -423,7 +425,8 @@ static bool fsnotify_iter_select_report_types( > * But is *this mark* watching children? > */ > if (type == FSNOTIFY_ITER_TYPE_PARENT && > - !(mark->mask & FS_EVENT_ON_CHILD)) > + !(mark->mask & FS_EVENT_ON_CHILD) && > + !(fsnotify_ignore_mask(mark) & FS_EVENT_ON_CHILD)) > continue; So now we have in ->report_mask the FSNOTIFY_ITER_TYPE_PARENT if either ->mask or ->ignore_mask have FS_EVENT_ON_CHILD set. But I see nothing that would stop us from applying say ->mask to the set of events we are interested in if FS_EVENT_ON_CHILD is set only in ->ignore_mask? And there's the same problem in the other direction as well. Am I missing something? Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR
