Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH] inotify 0.10.0 | From | John McCutchan <> | Date | Tue, 28 Sep 2004 16:26:07 -0400 |
| |
On Tue, 2004-09-28 at 01:45, Ray Lee wrote: > On Mon, 2004-09-27 at 16:52 -0400, Robert Love wrote: > > > > +struct inotify_event { > > > > + int wd; > > > > + int mask; > > > > + int cookie; > > > > + char filename[INOTIFY_FILENAME_MAX]; > > > > +}; > > > > > > yeah, that's not very nice. Better to kmalloc the pathname. > > > > That is the structure that we communicate with to user-space. > > > > We could kmalloc() filename, but it makes the user-space use a bit more > > complicated (and right now it is trivial and wonderfully simple). > > > > We've been debating the pros and cons. > > The current way pads out the structure unnecessarily, and still doesn't > handle the really long filenames, by your admission. It incurs extra > syscalls, as few filenames are really 256 characters in length. It makes > userspace double-check whether the filename extends all the way to the > boundary of the structure, and if so, then go back to the disk to try to > guess what the kernel really meant to say.
I thought that filenames where limited to 256 characters? That was the idea behind the 256 character limit.
John - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |