From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Shaya Potter Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/24] Unionfs: Documentation Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 20:50:42 -0500 Message-ID: <1168307442.5024.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20070108111852.ee156a90.akpm@osdl.org> <200701082051.l08KpV8b011212@agora.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu> <1pw35070vgjt0.vkrm8bjemedb$.dlg@40tude.net> <20070109003230.GD5418@filer.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Josef Sipek , Giuseppe Bilotta , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from cs.columbia.edu ([128.59.16.20]:41708 "EHLO cs.columbia.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750898AbXAIBvC (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Jan 2007 20:51:02 -0500 To: Jan Engelhardt In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 02:26 +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > On Jan 8 2007 19:33, Josef Sipek wrote: > >On Tue, Jan 09, 2007 at 01:19:48AM +0100, Giuseppe Bilotta wrote: > >> As a simple user without much knowledge of kernel internals, much less > >> so filesystems, couldn't something based on the same principle of > >> lsof+fam be used to handle these situations? > > > >Using inotify has been suggested before. That let the upper filesystem > >know when something changed on the lower filesystem. > > > >I think that, while it would work, it is not the right solution. > > Because inotify is not recursive yet? Even if it was, using inotify would be inherently racy (what if two writes start at the same time)