Re: Inotify Kernel Question

Wow. That never even occured to me (hence why I asked, I guess :). That
makes very good sense then, so thank you for the explanation (not to
mention the hard work you put into every inotify release). :)

-  Ken

On Fri, 2005-02-18 at 11:16 -0500, Robert Love wrote:
> Curiosity, my friend, killed the cat.
> Unfortunately, inotify cannot be built as a kernel module because it
> hooks directly into non-modular code, primarily low-level VFS functions.
> When the module is not loaded, the function pointers would dangle and
> cause massive deforestation when dereferenced.
> Of course, we could design a complicated plugin system that managed all
> of this and allowed for hot-swappable and dynamic file notification
> systems to be loaded and unloaded.  The generic filesystem notification
> layer I did is a great start to this.  But I think that is overkill and
> extraneous overhead and I suspect that the kernel community would agree.
> So no module.
> 	Robert Love

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]