Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <158454378820.2863966.10496767254293183123.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
 <158454391302.2863966.1884682840541676280.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
 <CAJfpegspWA6oUtdcYvYF=3fij=Bnq03b8VMbU9RNMKc+zzjbag@mail.gmail.com> <1293241.1595501326@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
In-Reply-To: <1293241.1595501326@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
From:   Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Date:   Mon, 3 Aug 2020 11:29:27 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJfpeguvLMCw1H8+DPsfZE_k0sEiRtA17pD9HjnceSsAvqqAZw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/17] watch_queue: Implement mount topology and attribute
 change notifications [ver #5]
To:     David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>,
        Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>,
        Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com>,
        Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>,
        Christian Brauner <christian@brauner.io>, andres@anarazel.de,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>, dray@redhat.com,
        Karel Zak <kzak@redhat.com>, keyrings@vger.kernel.org,
        Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        LSM <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 12:48 PM David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> wrote:

>
> > >                 __u32   topology_changes;
> > >                 __u32   attr_changes;
> > >                 __u32   aux_topology_changes;
> >
> > Being 32bit this introduces wraparound effects.  Is that really worth it?
>
> You'd have to make 2 billion changes without whoever's monitoring getting a
> chance to update their counters.  But maybe it's not worth it putting them
> here.  If you'd prefer, I can make the counters all 64-bit and just retrieve
> them with fsinfo().

Yes, I think that would be preferable.

> > >         n->watch.info & NOTIFY_MOUNT_IS_RECURSIVE if true indicates that
> > >         the notifcation was generated by an event (eg. SETATTR) that was
> > >         applied recursively.  The notification is only generated for the
> > >         object that initially triggered it.
> >
> > Unused in this patchset.  Please don't add things to the API which are not
> > used.
>
> Christian Brauner has patches for mount_setattr() that will need to use this.

Fine, then that patch can add the flag.

Thanks,
Miklos