[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       linux-api
Subject:    Re: [PATCH v2 0/9] Extend fanotify dirent events
From:       Amir Goldstein <amir73il () gmail ! com>
Date:       2021-11-29 19:12:17
Message-ID: CAOQ4uxhRv=2q3K89QG3T=Xne4PLUpN_sh8R=+PZETUa9GEJt-A () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Fri, Nov 26, 2021 at 5:28 PM Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> wrote:
>
> Hi Amir!
>
> On Fri 19-11-21 09:17:29, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > This is the 2nd version of FAN_REPORT_TARGET_FID patches [1].
> >
> > In the first version, extra info records about new and old parent+name
> > were added to FAN_MOVED_FROM event.  This version uses a new event
> > FAN_RENAME instead, to report those extra info records.
> > The new FAN_RENAME event was designed as a replacement for the
> > "inotify way" of joining the MOVED_FROM/MOVED_TO events using a cookie.
> >
> > FAN_RENAME event differs from MOVED_FROM/MOVED_TO events in several ways:
> > 1) The information about old/new names is provided in a single event
> > 2) When added to the ignored mask of a directory, FAN_RENAME is not
> >    reported for renames to and from that directory
> >
> > The group flag FAN_REPORT_TARGET_FID adds an extra info record of
> > the child fid to all the dirent events, including FAN_REANME.
> > It is independent of the FAN_RENAME changes and implemented in the
> > first patch, so it can be picked regardless of the FAN_RENAME patches.
> >
> > Patches [2] and LTP test [3] are available on my github.
> > A man page draft will be provided later on.
>
> I've read through the series and I had just two small comments. I was also
> slightly wondering whether instead of feeding the two directories for
> FS_RENAME into OBJ_TYPE_PARENT and OBJ_TYPE_INODE we should not create
> another iter_info type OBJ_TYPE_INODE2 as using OBJ_TYPE_PARENT is somewhat
> error prone (you have to get the ordering of conditions right so that you
> catch FS_RENAME e.g. before some code decides event should be discarded
> because it is parent event without child watching). But I have not fully
> decided whether the result is going to be worth it so I'm just mentioning
> it as a possible future cleanup.

I managed to use ITER_TYPE_INODE2 pretty easily after a cleanup that
splits OBJ_TYPE enum from ITER_TYPE enum.

Thanks,
Amir.
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]