Re: Beyond inotify recursive watches

[Al Viro]

On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 05:55:34PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:

> What your question reminds me is an idea of recursive modification time
> stamp on directories. That is a time stamp that gets updated whenever
> anything in the tree under the directory changes. Now this would be too
> expensive to maintain so there's also a trick implemented that you update
> the time stamp (and continue updating recursive time stamps upwards) only
> if a special flag is set on the directory. And you clear the flag at that
> moment. So until someone checks the time stamp and resets the flag no
> further updates of the recursive modification time happen.
> 
> This scheme works for arbitrary number of processes interested in recursive
> time stamps (only updates of the time stamps get more frequent). What is
> somewhat inconvenient is that this only tells you something in the
> directory or its subtree changed so you still have to scan all the
> directories on the path to modified file. So I'm not sure of how much use
> this would be to you.

Feel free to write up the details of locking you'll need for that.  It will
*not* be fun...
--
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/