[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090805020534.GB1354@ucw.cz>
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 04:05:34 +0200
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To: Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
malware-list@...sg.printk.net, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu,
greg@...ah.com, jcm@...hat.com, douglas.leeder@...hos.com,
tytso@....edu, arjan@...radead.org, david@...g.hm,
jengelh@...ozas.de, aviro@...hat.com, mrkafk@...il.com,
alexl@...hat.com, jack@...e.cz, tvrtko.ursulin@...hos.com,
a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, hch@...radead.org,
alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, mmorley@....in
Subject: Re: fanotify - overall design before I start sending patches
BTW my -@...e.cz address no longer works. pavel@....cz should be ok.
> If a FAN_ACCESS_PERM or FAN_OPEN_PERM event is received the listener
> must send a response before the 5 second timeout. If no response is
> sent before the 5 second timeout the original operation is allowed. If
> this happens too many times (10 in a row) the fanotify group is evicted
> from the kernel and will not get any new events. Sending a response is
> done using the setsockopt() call with the socket options set to
> FANOTIFY_ACCESS_RESPONSE. The buffer should contain a structure like:
The timeout part of interface is very ugly. Will fanotify users have
to be realtime/mlocked?
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.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