[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201008171748.57319.agruen@suse.de>
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 17:48:56 +0200
From: Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@...e.de>
To: Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Matt Helsley <matthltc@...ibm.com>,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
Michael Kerrisk <michael.kerrisk@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] notification tree - try 37!
On Tuesday 17 August 2010 17:24:28 Eric Paris wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-17 at 10:38 +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> > One of the wonky remaining bits is the way how files are reopened with
> > dentry_open() with the f_flags passed to fanotify_init(). The open can
> > fail, in which case the user is left with an error condition but with no
> > indication as to which object the error happened for. What the heck?
>
> What else can be done? When notification is based on an open fd and you
> can't give them an open fd, there's nothing left....
The main point would be to allow the listener to object the event is about.
This could be done by returning st_dev and st_ino in the event. (i_generation
might be useful too but we don't even return that in struct stat today.)
Another way would be to return a file pointer to a bad inode that can be
stat() normally, and to return the error code separately.
Al might have an opinion on that.
Andreas
--
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