lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cfd18e0f0811100915o8ea98a0s816921cee3163c1c@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 10 Nov 2008 12:15:36 -0500
From:	"Michael Kerrisk" <mtk.manpages@...glemail.com>
To:	"Evgeniy Polyakov" <zbr@...emap.net>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Robert Love" <rlove@...ve.org>,
	linux-api@...r.kernel.org, "John McCutchan" <ttb@...tacle.dhs.org>
Subject: Re: [1/1] Use pid in inotify events.

Hi Evgeniy,

On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:20 AM, Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net> wrote:
> Hi Michael.
>
> On Sat, Nov 08, 2008 at 11:58:30AM -0500, Michael Kerrisk (mtk.manpages@...glemail.com) wrote:
>> It's perhaps unfortunate that the structure wasn't padded out with a
>> few additional fields "for future use".  But -- maybe it is not really
>> true that we can't change things.  Two things to consider:
>>
>> a) We now (since 2.6.27) have an inotify_init1() which has a flags argument.
>> b) There are spare bits in the mask argument of inotify_add_watch()
>>
>> We could use a flag in either of these to say that we want a different
>> structure returned on read() from the inotify descriptor.  In the
>> first case, this would be a global setting for all inotify events on
>> that descriptor.  In the second, we could do it on a per-watch basis
>> (I'm not so sure that that is a nice idea).  Since we are in any case
>> extending the ABI, and new applications would need to be taught about
>> the extension, it seems we could consider either of the alternative
>> extensions I mentioned, which woul also allow the PID to be obtained
>> for rename() events.  What do you think?
>
> This may be a good idea for some serious ABI change. I think we could
> extend it even more to include IO offset/size into events and attribute
> changes.

Are you going to revise your patch to use this idea?

Cheers,

Michael

-- 
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git
man-pages online: http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/online_pages.html
Found a bug? http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/reporting_bugs.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ