mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To: Phil Endecott <phil_wueww_endecott@chezphil.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: No error when inotify_add_watch(/an/NFS/file)
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2007 15:37:14 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071124203714.GD12864@fieldses.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1195935105978@dmwebmail.japan.chezphil.org>

On Sat, Nov 24, 2007 at 08:11:45PM +0000, Phil Endecott wrote:
> J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 11:20:55PM +0000, Phil Endecott wrote:
>>> Dear Experts,
>>>
>>> NFS doesn't work with inotify (and it looks like it can't, certainly not 
>>> before NFS v4.1).  However, if I give an NFS filename to 
>>> inotify_add_watch(), I don't get an error.
>>>
>>> If it indicated an error in this case then I could easily fall back to 
>>> some sort of polling.  Without an error, I need some other way to detect 
>>> NFS (and any other non-inotify-compatible filesystems).
>>>
>>> Any thoughts?
>>
>> The one reason I can think of that you might want that behavior is if
>> you know you only access a given piece of the filesystem from one client
>> at a time, and you still want inotify to work in that situation.
>
> That's a good point.
>
>> (I'm assuming inotify still notifies you of changes that are made on the same
>> client.)
>
> A quick test suggest that it does.
>
>> But maybe you could handle that case by allowing inotify_add_watch() in
>> the case where the nfs filesystem was mounted with the "nolock" option,
>> and failing it otherwise, and telling people to turn on nolock if
>> they're sure they know what they're doing.
>
> I'm not sure what your rationale for proposing that is, and I don't think 
> it helps in my scenario; a user wants their inotify-using application to 
> "just work", not to be told to "sudo re-mount".

I agree, it doesn't help you much.  But for a user that's stuck with an
application that just refuses to do anything if it can't use inotify,
this would allow them to tell the nfs client, "it's OK to let
applications on this filesystem use inotify, because nobody else writes
to this filesystem."

> I suppose that I just need some way to determine whether I will get all, 
> some, or none of the events that I've asked for.

Right.  So you'd like to know that if an inotify watch is granted, that
means you really are going to get notified about everything (either
because the kernel really does have the required knowledge about every
change, or in the "nfs mounted with nolock case" because the user has
told the kernel it doesn't have to worry about the changes it can't
track).

--b.

      reply	other threads:[~2007-11-24 20:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-11-23 23:20 Phil Endecott
2007-11-24 19:59 ` J. Bruce Fields
2007-11-24 20:11   ` Phil Endecott
2007-11-24 20:37     ` J. Bruce Fields [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20071124203714.GD12864@fieldses.org \
    --to=bfields@fieldses.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=phil_wueww_endecott@chezphil.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®