From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Howells Subject: Re: Why add the general notification queue and its sources Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2019 22:19:10 +0100 Message-ID: <24430.1567804750@warthog.procyon.org.uk> References: <20190906174102.GB2819@mit.edu> <5396.1567719164@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <14883.1567725508@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <27732.1567764557@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <8e60555e-9247-e03f-e8b4-1d31f70f1221@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20190906174102.GB2819@mit.edu> Content-ID: <24429.1567804750.1@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, Linus Torvalds , Steven Whitehouse , Ray Strode , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Nicolas Dichtel , raven@themaw.net, keyrings@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-block , Christian Brauner , LSM List , linux-fsdevel , Linux API , Linux List Kernel Mailing , Al Viro , "Ray, Debarshi" , Robbie Harwood List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > Something else which we should consider up front is how to handle the > case where you have multiple userspace processes that want to > subscribe to the same notification. I have that. > This also implies that we'll need to have some kind of standard header > at the beginning to specify the source of a particular notification > message. That too. David