Re: [patch] stop inotify from sending random DELETE_SELF event underload

[Linus Torvalds]

On Tue, 20 Sep 2005, Ray Lee wrote:
> 
> I can't even talk to that level, but perhaps it'd help to know that some
> (I think) are pinning their hopes on inotify as the foundation of a
> userspace negative dentry cache (i.e., samba trying to prove a set of
> filenames (case-insensitively) doesn't exist).

Note that than you should use the _name_ caching part, ie the 
fsnotify_nameremove() part of the equation. That part is unambiguous.

It's literally only the "inode" things (IN_DELETE_SELF) that are
questionable. And that's fundamentally because the "self" can live on for
_longer_ than the name that points to it.

I really think that the patch I sent out yesterday is as good as it gets.  
If you want immediate notification, you should ask for notification about
name changes in a particular directory. IN_DELETE_SELF notification on a
file simple is _not_ going to be immediate.

		Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/