On Saturday, 19 September 2009 5:04:31 Eric Paris wrote: > Let me start by saying I am agreeing I should pursue subtree > notification. It's what I think everyone really wants. It's a great > idea, and I think you might have a simple way to get close. Clearly > these are avenues I'm willing and hoping to pursue. Also I say it > again, I believe the interface as proposed (except maybe some of my > exclusion stuff) is flexible enough to implement any of these ideas. > Does anyone disagree? It does seem flexible enough. However, the current interface assumes "global" listeners (the mask argument of fanotify_init): int fanotify_init(int flags, int f_flags, __u64 mask, unsigned int priority); Once subtree support is added, this parameter becomes obsolete. That's pretty broken for a syscall yet to be introduced. > BUT to solve one of the main problems fanotify is intending to solve it > needs a way to be the 'fscking all notifier.' It needs to be the whole > damn system. Think of a system after boot, with a single global namespace. Whatever you access by filename is reachable from the namespace root. At this point, nothing more global exists. A listener can watch the mount points of interest, and everything's fine. What's a bit more tricky is to ensure that this listener will continue to receive all events from whatever else is mounted anywhere, irrespective of namespaces. I think we can get there. By the way, Documentation/filesystems/sharedsubtree.txt describes how filesystem namespaces work. Thanks, Andreas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
