From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Eric Paris <eparis-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: A few concerns about fanotify implementation.
Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2011 11:53:11 -0400
Message-ID: <1307375593.2052.7.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1288095195.29745.4010.camel@novikov-v>
	<201010261358.46974.tvrtko.ursulin@sophos.com>
	<1288169699.7715.103.camel@novikov-v>
	<1288195134.2655.202.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4DE8ACAD.2080003@kaspersky.com>
	<C511438CDC161C41B3C47B91D99ABA8D37B4B42114@UK-EXCHMBX1.green.sophos>
	<4DEC9B86.6060506@kaspersky.com>
	<1307367787.2052.6.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4DECE76E.4060507@kaspersky.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "linux-fsdevel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" <linux-fsdevel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
	"malware-list-h+Im9A44IAFcMpApZELgcQ@public.gmane.org" <malware-list-h+Im9A44IAFcMpApZELgcQ@public.gmane.org>,
	Douglas Leeder <douglas.leeder-j34lQMj1tz/QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
To: Vasily Novikov <vasily.novikov-BkmlMuIjteXqlBn2x/YWAg@public.gmane.org>
Return-path: <malware-list-bounces-h+Im9A44IAFcMpApZELgcQ@public.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <4DECE76E.4060507-BkmlMuIjteXqlBn2x/YWAg@public.gmane.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dmesg2.printk.net/cgi-bin/mailman/options/malware-list>,
	<mailto:malware-list-request-h+Im9A44IAFcMpApZELgcQ@public.gmane.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dmesg2.printk.net/pipermail/malware-list>
List-Post: <mailto:malware-list-h+Im9A44IAFcMpApZELgcQ@public.gmane.org>
List-Help: <mailto:malware-list-request-h+Im9A44IAFcMpApZELgcQ@public.gmane.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dmesg2.printk.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/malware-list>,
	<mailto:malware-list-request-h+Im9A44IAFcMpApZELgcQ@public.gmane.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: malware-list-bounces-h+Im9A44IAFcMpApZELgcQ@public.gmane.org
Errors-To: malware-list-bounces-h+Im9A44IAFcMpApZELgcQ@public.gmane.org
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org

On Mon, 2011-06-06 at 18:42 +0400, Vasily Novikov wrote:
> On 06/06/2011 05:43 PM, Eric Paris wrote:
> > Well, you are both correct.  If you add a mark with only 'ignored'
> > events set it will not pin the inode into the kernel.  If the system
> > starts to get under memory pressure the kernel will kick unused inodes
> > and any associated ignored marks out of ram.  Inodes with 'real' events
> > attached will be pinned in memory and cannot be evicted under memory
> > pressure.
> 
> So if we use marks with only 'ignored' events then under memory pressure 
> mm subsystem will shrink inode cache that will free our marks and 
> therefore it's safe to use FAN_UNLIMITED_MARKS in this case?
> If it really works then we don't need LRU cache in fanotify because it's 
> already implemented in dentry_cache/inode_cache.

That's how it's supposed to work.  Just remember, if you set a real
event, the inode becomes pinned in core and the mm will be unable to
evict either the inode or the mark.

-Eric