From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751721AbcEKPKH (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 11 May 2016 11:10:07 -0400
Received: from qarx.de ([31.15.64.162]:43139 "EHLO a.mx.fefe.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751333AbcEKPKG (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 11 May 2016 11:10:06 -0400
Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 17:09:59 +0200
From: Felix von Leitner <felix-linuxkernel@fefe.de>
To: Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@pmeerw.net>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: getting mysterious (to me) EINVAL from inotify_rm_watch
Message-ID: <20160511150959.GA18352@qarx.de>
Mail-Followup-To: Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@pmeerw.net>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20160511142251.GA30812@qarx.de>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1605111643220.30706@pmeerw.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1605111643220.30706@pmeerw.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Thus spake Peter Meerwald-Stadler (pmeerw@pmeerw.net):
> > I am trying to add inotify support to my tail implementation (for -F).
> > This is what happens:
> > 
> >   inotify_init()                          = 4
> >   inotify_add_watch(4, "/tmp/foo", IN_MODIFY) = 1
> >   inotify_rm_watch(4, 1)                  = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
> >   inotify_add_watch(4, "/tmp/foo", IN_MODIFY) = 2
> > 
> > There is also some polling, some reading and some statting going on here, but
> > those are on other descriptors than 4 so they should not matter).
> > 
> > Can somebody explain the EINVAL I'm getting from inotify_rm_watch to me?
> > This is a stock kernel 4.5.0.

> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <sys/inotify.h>
> int main() {
> int fd, i, j;
> printf("init %d\n", fd=inotify_init()); // 3
> printf("add %d\n", i=inotify_add_watch(fd, "/tmp/foo", IN_MODIFY)); // 1
> printf("rm %d\n", inotify_rm_watch(fd, i)); // 0
> printf("add %d\n", j=inotify_add_watch(fd, "/tmp/foo", IN_MODIFY)); // 2
> return 0;
> }

> Ubuntu kernel x86_64 4.4.0-21, seems to work here
> so we have to guess what's going on between _add and _rm?

Oh, it turns out to be my fault.
I called close() on the file first, then did inotify_rm_watch.

It was not clear to me from the documentation that that automatically
removes the inotify watch.

Sorry for the noise,

Felix