Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753425AbYKSOoF (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:44:05 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753519AbYKSOno (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:43:44 -0500 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.155]:5004 "EHLO fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753470AbYKSOnn (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:43:43 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :content-disposition:references; b=X+jC2UGy0qdYxqHu4H3fj6Gl3/cZjY46Ta/fSjCg84J0Ao3Ba6Y6HxFC2V+ef53tdh RrM10iJkfdIM5oCm5IP7FMh0Z/LZF3LOLkkqkllfpTApvTxGOuJdfZEpp4rVOEduEuxy jim+mGQKa2VKXWXabfbtgmspUk+yTb5uvd3Tg= Message-ID: Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:43:41 -0500 From: "Michael Kerrisk" Reply-To: mtk.manpages@gmail.com To: "Evgeniy Polyakov" Subject: Re: [take 3] Use pid in inotify events. Cc: "Christoph Hellwig" , "Robert Love" , linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Andrew Morton" , john@johnmccutchan.com In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20081116232450.GA13547@ioremap.net> <20081118131937.GC16944@lst.de> <20081119140500.GA25968@ioremap.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2094 Lines: 51 [RESENT, because LKML bounced some HTML that accidentally got put in the mail.] [CC+=John McCutchan, this time with hopefully a live email address; John, some context here: http://marc.info/?t=122633022400003&r=1&w=2 ] Evgeniy, On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > > Hi Christoph. > > On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 02:19:37PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig (hch@lst.de) wrote: > > Yes, this kind of thing should be enable using an flag to inotify1, and > > be consistant even for rename. Doing it as a flag to inotify1 also has > > the advantage to be able to return an -EPERM when the feature is > > requested but not allowed instead of letting applications that assume it > > silently fail. > > So effectively you propose to have second generation of the inotify > which will have additional pid field, which will be unused by all but > the same uid events? I suspect that Christoph wants the same thing as I do: some thinking towards a future-proof design, rather than a quick hack to address the needs of a single application. > If you want to return -EPERM, than it will be _always_ returned for non > sysadmin capable user, which effectively makes it unusable. Again, appropriate flags in inotify_init1() could fix this -- e.g., only fill the field (and give an error if no perms) if a flag is set. I think what is really needed at this point is some consideration of what other extensions (if any) might be desired for inotify, and how we might be best create a design that suits those and future needs. Cheers, Michael -- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git man-pages online: http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/online_pages.html Found a bug? http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/reporting_bugs.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/