Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Subject | Re: fanotify - overall design before I start sending patches | From | Eric Paris <> | Date | Fri, 07 Aug 2009 13:43:10 -0400 |
| |
On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 18:36 +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > On Thu, 06 Aug 2009, Eric Paris wrote: > > just work. The whole reason for the timeout is because I don't trust > > userspace not to get it wrong and I'd rather not lose my box because of > > it. > > IMO this has nothing to do with userspace(*) and everything to do with > complexity. Virus scanning is complex and any such code, whether > runing in userspace or not, can easily screw up and freeze the system.
I agree, 'userspace' was not the best term. Let me rephrase:
"The whole reason for the timeout is because I don't trust anything not to get it wrong and I'd rather not lose my box because of it."
> The way to solve that is not to implement hacks on the kernel > interface, but rather by separating the complex parts and implementing > a simple watchdog layer on top of that, that makes sure things don't > go wrong.
So you would argue that every fanotify listener implement their own watchdog layer that may or may not be correct rather than do a single watchdog layer for everyone? And that's better?
-Eric
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |