[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240620094151.cuamehtaioenokyv@quack3>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 11:41:51 +0200
From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>,
Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>,
James Clark <james.clark@....com>, ltp@...ts.linux.it,
linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] VFS: generate FS_CREATE before FS_OPEN when
->atomic_open used.
On Tue 18-06-24 16:19:37, Christian Brauner wrote:
> > AFAICT this will have a side-effect that now fsnotify_open() will be
> > generated even for O_PATH open. It is true that fsnotify_close() is getting
>
> Thanks! That change seemed sensible because a close() event is
> generated.
>
> But I don't agree that generating events for O_PATH fds doesn't make
> sense on principle. But I don't care if you drop events for O_PATH now.
Well, I can be convinced otherwise but I was not able to find a compeling
usecase for it. fanotify(8) users primarily care about file data
modification / access events and secondarily also about directory content
changes (because they change how data can be accessed). And creation of
O_PATH fds does not seem to fall into either of these categories...
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>
SUSE Labs, CR
Powered by blists - more mailing lists