On 2010-08-19, at 21:38, Eric Paris wrote: > On Fri, 2010-08-20 at 01:41 +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: >> Being able to identify the object that an event refers to is important. There >> are two ways to do that: >> >> (1) Include fields like st_dev and st_ino in struct >> fanotify_event_metadata. > > On a more realistic note, I'm not opposed to (1), however, your > arguments would lead one to reject inotify as the IN_OVERFLOW or oom > conditions will result in silently lost events or events which provide > no useful information since the notification system has broken down. > When the appropriate use of notification is impossible I'm certainly not > opposed to patches which add best effort information, but you are > already outside the bounds of a reasonably functional system and there > is no good solution. What about unifying the file identification here with the file handle used for open_by_handle()? That keeps a consistent identifier for the inode between multiple system calls (always a good thing), and allows the inode to be opened again via open_by_handle() if needed. Cheers, 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
