On Thu, 14 Oct 2021 00:21:32 +0900 Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > This approach requires an FD returned and either an int for the status > > page or the returend FD could expose the ID via another IOCTL being > > issued. > > OK, I would like to suggest you to add events/user-events/*/marker file > (which returns that shared file struct backed FD) so that some simple > user scripts can also send the events (these may not use ioctl, just > write the events.) But this can be done afterwards anyway. > I'd prefer we avoid this. It will break some of the semantics of the events directory. One, only "user-events" will have this "marker" file. Although it will be very similar to the "inject" file, but that's only for debugging anyway. All the files in the events directory is starting to add a bunch of overhead, as they are typically copied into the instances. Although, when we get the eventfs directory created, maybe that will not be as big of a deal. But that still doesn't fix the semantics issue. -- Steve
|