Hi Evgeniy, On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:20 AM, Evgeniy Polyakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Michael. > > On Sat, Nov 08, 2008 at 11:58:30AM -0500, Michael Kerrisk ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > wrote: >> It's perhaps unfortunate that the structure wasn't padded out with a >> few additional fields "for future use". But -- maybe it is not really >> true that we can't change things. Two things to consider: >> >> a) We now (since 2.6.27) have an inotify_init1() which has a flags argument. >> b) There are spare bits in the mask argument of inotify_add_watch() >> >> We could use a flag in either of these to say that we want a different >> structure returned on read() from the inotify descriptor. In the >> first case, this would be a global setting for all inotify events on >> that descriptor. In the second, we could do it on a per-watch basis >> (I'm not so sure that that is a nice idea). Since we are in any case >> extending the ABI, and new applications would need to be taught about >> the extension, it seems we could consider either of the alternative >> extensions I mentioned, which woul also allow the PID to be obtained >> for rename() events. What do you think? > > This may be a good idea for some serious ABI change. I think we could > extend it even more to include IO offset/size into events and attribute > changes.
Are you going to revise your patch to use this idea? 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-api" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
