On Thursday 14 July 2005 13:50, you wrote: > Hi Tim, > > On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 02:18:20PM -0500, Timothy R. Chavez wrote: > > diff --exclude=.git -Nurp audit-2.6/include/linux/watch.h audit-2.6.git-fsnotify/include/linux/watch.h > > --- audit-2.6/include/linux/watch.h > > +++ audit-2.6.git-fsnotify/include/linux/watch.h > > @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@ > > +#ifndef _WATCH_H > > +#define _WATCH_H > > + > > +struct watch { > > + atomic_t w_count; > > + struct hlist_node w_node; /* per-directory list */ > > + struct hlist_node w_master; /* Master watch list */ > > + struct hlist_node w_watched; /* Watches on inode */ > > + dev_t w_dev; /* Superblock device */ > > + __u32 w_perms; /* Permissions filtering */ > > + char *w_name; /* Watch beneath parent */ > > + char *w_path; /* Insertion path */ > > + char *w_filterkey; /* An arbitrary filtering key */ > > + void (*w_func); /* Callback function */ > > +}; > > Looking at this structure, I'm wondering if it is sufficient for > inotify. Inotify's watches are associated with an instance of an > inotify device. How were you planning to account for that? Hi Amy, That structure is incomplete :(

Inotify will account for that... there's some trickery being that will let systems like audit and Inotify use their own specialized watches, but embed the fswatch into them as that is the common piece.