> > Ultimately, the part where we differ most, is the processing of information in
> > fs/dcache.c to give dynamic updates in response to file system activity (such
> > as attaching audit information to an auditable file whose inode just changed).  
> > I believe this should be kept seperate and not part of this framework nor Inotify.  
> > It's a specific requirement for audit, but not for Inotify.  This is one of the places
> > the two systems are functionally different.
>
> I don't think it should be different.  If inotify wants to just ignore
> this information, it can.

Doesn't this mentality bring with it the risk of bloating a framework that should be as
"trim" as possible? A seperation of functionality, while it might not be a large issue
between these two systems, brings with it the expectation that any other systems
using this common framework to keep their specific requirements seperate,
not inflating, and therefore complicating, what could, and should, be a lightweight
framework.

Mike