Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 13 Feb 2010 20:31:17 +0100 | From | Joris Dolderer <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/3] fsnotify: tree-watching support |
| |
Shall I, now, resubmit immediately or wait for other reviews?
On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 11:12:15 -0800 Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net> wrote:
> On 02/13/10 01:05, Joris Dolderer wrote: > > Add tree-watching support to fsnotify. > > Hope mail works now... > > Yes, much better, thanks. > > The following review just concerns documentation... > > > Signed-off-by: Joris Dolderer <vorstadtkind@googlemail.com> > > --- > > fs/debugfs/inode.c | 8 - > > fs/namei.c | 8 - > > fs/notify/fsnotify.c | 188 +++++++++++++++++++++++------ > > fs/notify/fsnotify.h | 1 > > fs/notify/inode_mark.c | 46 ++++++- > > include/linux/dcache.h | 3 > > include/linux/fsnotify.h | 55 +++++--- > > include/linux/fsnotify_backend.h | 51 +++++-- > > 8 files changed, 279 insertions(+), 81 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/notify/fsnotify.c b/fs/notify/fsnotify.c > > index 037e878..17cd902 100644 > > --- a/fs/notify/fsnotify.c > > +++ b/fs/notify/fsnotify.c > > [snip] > > > +/* Notify this dentry's ancestors about a child's events. */ > > +void __fsnotify_ancestors(struct dentry *dentry, __u32 mask) > > +{ > > + if (dentry->d_flags & DCACHE_FSNOTIFY_PARENT_WATCHED) { > > + struct dentry *parent; > > + struct inode *p_inode; > > + bool should_update_children = false; > > + bool send = false; > > + > > + spin_lock(&dentry->d_lock); > > + > > + parent = dentry->d_parent; > > + p_inode = parent->d_inode; > > > > - if (fsnotify_inode_watches_children(p_inode)) { > > - if (p_inode->i_fsnotify_mask & mask) { > > + if (fsnotify_inode_watches_children(p_inode)) { > > + if (p_inode->i_fsnotify_mask & mask) { > > + dget(parent); > > + send = true; > > + } > > + } else { > > + /* > > + * The parent doesn't care about events on it's children but > > its > (yes, it's just moved, but please correct it) > ("it's" means "it is", not possessive) > > > + * at least one child thought it did. We need to run all the > > + * children and update their d_flags to let them know p_inode > > + * doesn't care about them any more. > > + */ > > dget(parent); > > - send = true; > > + should_update_children = true; > > } > > [snip] > > > +} > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__fsnotify_ancestors); > > + > > +/* > > + * notify tree-watching ancestors > > + * @dentry: The dentry the walkup should start with > > + * @file_name: The string that should be appended to this dentries' path > > + * @file_len: The length of this string > > + */ > > Please use kernel-doc notation for this and other exported symbols. > See Documentation/kernel-doc-nano-HOWTO.txt for details, or ask me if you > have questions about it. > > E.g.: > > /** > * fsnotify_far_ancestors - notify tree-watching ancestors > * @dentry: The dentry the walkup should start with > * @file_name: The string that should be appended to this dentries' path > * @file_len: The length of this string > * @mask: <description> > */ > > > > +void fsnotify_far_ancestors(struct dentry *dentry, const unsigned char *file_name, int file_len, __u32 mask) > > +{ > ... > > > } > > -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__fsnotify_parent); > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(fsnotify_far_ancestors); > > > > /* > > * This is the main call to fsnotify. The VFS calls into hook specific functions > > > diff --git a/fs/notify/inode_mark.c b/fs/notify/inode_mark.c > > index 3165d85..67ad9cb 100644 > > --- a/fs/notify/inode_mark.c > > +++ b/fs/notify/inode_mark.c > > @@ -195,14 +216,16 @@ void fsnotify_destroy_mark_by_entry(struct fsnotify_mark_entry *entry) > > > > /* > > * __fsnotify_update_child_dentry_flags(inode); > > + * or __fsnotify_update_descents; > > * > > * I really want to call that, but we can't, we have no idea if the inode > > * still exists the second we drop the entry->lock. > > * > > * The next time an event arrive to this inode from one of it's children > > arrives its > > > - * __fsnotify_parent will see that the inode doesn't care about it's > > - * children and will update all of these flags then. So really this > > - * is just a lazy update (and could be a perf win...) > > + * __fsnotify_ancestors resp. fsnotify_far_ancestors will see that the > > What is "resp." ? > > > + * inode doesn't care about it's children and will update all of these > > its > > > + * flags then. So really this is just a lazy update (and could be a > > + * perf win...) > > */ > > > diff --git a/include/linux/fsnotify_backend.h b/include/linux/fsnotify_backend.h > > index 4d6f47b..1bea473 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/fsnotify_backend.h > > +++ b/include/linux/fsnotify_backend.h > > [snip] > > > -static inline int fsnotify_inode_watches_children(struct inode *inode) > > +static inline bool fsnotify_inode_watches_something(struct inode *inode, u32 what) > > { > > - /* FS_EVENT_ON_CHILD is set if the inode may care */ > > - if (!(inode->i_fsnotify_mask & FS_EVENT_ON_CHILD)) > > + /* what is set if the inode may care */ > > + if (!(inode->i_fsnotify_mask & what)) > > return 0; > > return false; > > > /* this inode might care about child events, does it care about the > > * specific set of events that can happen on a child? */ > > return inode->i_fsnotify_mask & FS_EVENTS_POSS_ON_CHILD; > > } > > > -- > ~Randy
| |