Re: watch dir problem
On Thu, 2005-05-26 at 15:18 -0500, Timothy R. Chavez wrote:
--
dwmw2
Are you using a .49 or .50 kernel? I wasn't quite sure if David
said "OK" to just
using the hash table from now on or to use the i_audit field until we're in the
clear.
Yes, let's just use the hash table from now on.
David has incorporated most of the cleanups I had and then he made
some
more which I've also added to my tree.. and the last major thing I can think of
is to correctly handle audit_notify_watch() in fs/namei.c
OK, I'll leave that one to you while I play with trying to allocate
inode audit data for only those inodes which need it -- which will make
the decision to use a hash table sane for upstream too.
If we're going to be poking at the same piece of code we should probably
have a communication channel which has lower latency than email. I've
created a #audit channel on irc.freenode.net.
Not that you're going to get _much_ more out of me tonight, mind you :)