Messages in this thread |  | | | Subject | Re: fanotify - overall design before I start sending patches | | From | Eric Paris <> | | Date | Wed, 29 Jul 2009 16:14:15 -0400 |
| |
On Mon, 2009-07-27 at 20:23 +0100, Jamie Lokier wrote: > Andreas Dilger wrote: > > On Jul 25, 2009 01:29 +0100, Jamie Lokier wrote: > > > Eric Paris wrote:
> What's wrong with fanotify-using applications generating events when > they modify files themselves? > > An example was given where app A gets an event and modifies the file, > then app B gets an event and modifies the file, and app A... cycling.
No the example was the 'open' which the kernel does on behalf of the listener. I'm thinking now I should only exclude
OPEN OPEN_PERM ACCESS_PERM
as those are the only 3 event types I can see deadlock/recursion problems with.
|  |