[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: VFS hooks analysis (pass 1)

On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 04:36:25PM -0400, Amy Griffis wrote:
> > Here's my thinking.  It'd be nice to have a complete set of Inotify hooks
> > that map to specific Inotify events (IN_*).  Thus, even though the above
> > syscalls may be sufficiently covered by the hook placements in the 
> > getname() and path_lookup() functions, I think we should split them out
> > into seperate Inotify hooks.  
> Thanks for the input, Tim.  I'll look into this.

I've realized a problem with replacing getname and path_lookup with
Inotify hooks.  With Inotify, you have to register for the desired
events on a specific file.  The getname and path_lookup hooks apply
universally.  So if we removed them, we would no longer gather any
filesystem info (other than pathname from syscall arg) unless there
was a filter/watch specified.  

I'm not sure this would be the desired behavior.  It works for
filtering, but not for providing a complete log record in the general


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]