> Is dir_notify suitable for inotify and your uses?
The six dir_notify flags obviously map better to the network protocol
which cifs can request (and which Samba server needs to respond to
various network filesystem clients) but the 11 IN_ flags do not seem
that different.
>The problem with dir_no
On Wed, 2005-07-13 at 15:21 -0500, Steve French wrote:
> I did not think that inotify_add_watch called dir_notify. I don't see a path
> in which
> calls to add a new inotify watch end up in a call to fcntl_dirnotify or
> file->dir_notify
> This is for the case in which an app only calls inoti
>> I don't see an inode operation for registering inotify events in the fs
>> (there is a file operation for dir_notify to register its events). In
>> create_watch in fs/inotify.c I expected to see something like:
>Why not use the existing dir_notify method? No point in adding another.
I did not
On Wed, 2005-07-13 at 13:43 -0500, Steve French wrote:
> I don't see an inode operation for registering inotify events in the fs
> (there is a file operation for dir_notify to register its events). In
> create_watch in fs/inotify.c I expected to see something like:
Why not use the existing dir_n
It looks like a couple of exports and a key supporting function are
missing from the inotify patch that went into mainline yesterday.
I don't see an inode operation for registering inotify events in the fs
(there is a file operation for dir_notify to register its events). In
create_watch in fs/in
5 matches
Mail list logo
