diff options
author | Robert Love <rml@novell.com> | 2005-07-15 06:56:33 -0400 |
---|---|---|
committer | Linus Torvalds <torvalds@g5.osdl.org> | 2005-07-15 12:54:51 -0400 |
commit | 6f97933d0fd13920d7d53b6e0107bb674b3a1f0b (patch) | |
tree | f6e5a75915e10747b8e472b9452db5a767c3340a /Documentation | |
parent | 35e422c967d3208f188e3096c9f603ac7333fb1b (diff) |
[PATCH] inotify: documentation update
Clean up and expand some of the inotify documentation.
Signed-off-by: Robert Love <rml@novell.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation')
-rw-r--r-- | Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt | 77 |
1 files changed, 45 insertions, 32 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt b/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt index 2c716041f578..6d501903f68e 100644 --- a/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt | |||
@@ -1,18 +1,22 @@ | |||
1 | inotify | 1 | inotify |
2 | a powerful yet simple file change notification system | 2 | a powerful yet simple file change notification system |
3 | 3 | ||
4 | 4 | ||
5 | 5 | ||
6 | Document started 15 Mar 2005 by Robert Love <rml@novell.com> | 6 | Document started 15 Mar 2005 by Robert Love <rml@novell.com> |
7 | 7 | ||
8 | |||
8 | (i) User Interface | 9 | (i) User Interface |
9 | 10 | ||
10 | Inotify is controlled by a set of three sys calls | 11 | Inotify is controlled by a set of three system calls and normal file I/O on a |
12 | returned file descriptor. | ||
11 | 13 | ||
12 | First step in using inotify is to initialise an inotify instance | 14 | First step in using inotify is to initialise an inotify instance: |
13 | 15 | ||
14 | int fd = inotify_init (); | 16 | int fd = inotify_init (); |
15 | 17 | ||
18 | Each instance is associated with a unique, ordered queue. | ||
19 | |||
16 | Change events are managed by "watches". A watch is an (object,mask) pair where | 20 | Change events are managed by "watches". A watch is an (object,mask) pair where |
17 | the object is a file or directory and the mask is a bit mask of one or more | 21 | the object is a file or directory and the mask is a bit mask of one or more |
18 | inotify events that the application wishes to receive. See <linux/inotify.h> | 22 | inotify events that the application wishes to receive. See <linux/inotify.h> |
@@ -22,43 +26,52 @@ Watches are added via a path to the file. | |||
22 | 26 | ||
23 | Watches on a directory will return events on any files inside of the directory. | 27 | Watches on a directory will return events on any files inside of the directory. |
24 | 28 | ||
25 | Adding a watch is simple, | 29 | Adding a watch is simple: |
26 | 30 | ||
27 | int wd = inotify_add_watch (fd, path, mask); | 31 | int wd = inotify_add_watch (fd, path, mask); |
28 | 32 | ||
29 | You can add a large number of files via something like | 33 | Where "fd" is the return value from inotify_init(), path is the path to the |
30 | 34 | object to watch, and mask is the watch mask (see <linux/inotify.h>). | |
31 | for each file to watch { | ||
32 | int wd = inotify_add_watch (fd, file, mask); | ||
33 | } | ||
34 | 35 | ||
35 | You can update an existing watch in the same manner, by passing in a new mask. | 36 | You can update an existing watch in the same manner, by passing in a new mask. |
36 | 37 | ||
37 | An existing watch is removed via the INOTIFY_IGNORE ioctl, for example | 38 | An existing watch is removed via |
38 | 39 | ||
39 | inotify_rm_watch (fd, wd); | 40 | int ret = inotify_rm_watch (fd, wd); |
40 | 41 | ||
41 | Events are provided in the form of an inotify_event structure that is read(2) | 42 | Events are provided in the form of an inotify_event structure that is read(2) |
42 | from a inotify instance fd. The filename is of dynamic length and follows the | 43 | from a given inotify instance. The filename is of dynamic length and follows |
43 | struct. It is of size len. The filename is padded with null bytes to ensure | 44 | the struct. It is of size len. The filename is padded with null bytes to |
44 | proper alignment. This padding is reflected in len. | 45 | ensure proper alignment. This padding is reflected in len. |
45 | 46 | ||
46 | You can slurp multiple events by passing a large buffer, for example | 47 | You can slurp multiple events by passing a large buffer, for example |
47 | 48 | ||
48 | size_t len = read (fd, buf, BUF_LEN); | 49 | size_t len = read (fd, buf, BUF_LEN); |
49 | 50 | ||
50 | Will return as many events as are available and fit in BUF_LEN. | 51 | Where "buf" is a pointer to an array of "inotify_event" structures at least |
52 | BUF_LEN bytes in size. The above example will return as many events as are | ||
53 | available and fit in BUF_LEN. | ||
51 | 54 | ||
52 | each inotify instance fd is also select()- and poll()-able. | 55 | Each inotify instance fd is also select()- and poll()-able. |
53 | 56 | ||
54 | You can find the size of the current event queue via the FIONREAD ioctl. | 57 | You can find the size of the current event queue via the standard FIONREAD |
58 | ioctl on the fd returned by inotify_init(). | ||
55 | 59 | ||
56 | All watches are destroyed and cleaned up on close. | 60 | All watches are destroyed and cleaned up on close. |
57 | 61 | ||
58 | 62 | ||
59 | (ii) Internal Kernel Implementation | 63 | (ii) |
64 | |||
65 | Prototypes: | ||
66 | |||
67 | int inotify_init (void); | ||
68 | int inotify_add_watch (int fd, const char *path, __u32 mask); | ||
69 | int inotify_rm_watch (int fd, __u32 mask); | ||
70 | |||
60 | 71 | ||
61 | Each open inotify instance is associated with an inotify_device structure. | 72 | (iii) Internal Kernel Implementation |
73 | |||
74 | Each inotify instance is associated with an inotify_device structure. | ||
62 | 75 | ||
63 | Each watch is associated with an inotify_watch structure. Watches are chained | 76 | Each watch is associated with an inotify_watch structure. Watches are chained |
64 | off of each associated device and each associated inode. | 77 | off of each associated device and each associated inode. |
@@ -66,7 +79,7 @@ off of each associated device and each associated inode. | |||
66 | See fs/inotify.c for the locking and lifetime rules. | 79 | See fs/inotify.c for the locking and lifetime rules. |
67 | 80 | ||
68 | 81 | ||
69 | (iii) Rationale | 82 | (iv) Rationale |
70 | 83 | ||
71 | Q: What is the design decision behind not tying the watch to the open fd of | 84 | Q: What is the design decision behind not tying the watch to the open fd of |
72 | the watched object? | 85 | the watched object? |
@@ -75,9 +88,9 @@ A: Watches are associated with an open inotify device, not an open file. | |||
75 | This solves the primary problem with dnotify: keeping the file open pins | 88 | This solves the primary problem with dnotify: keeping the file open pins |
76 | the file and thus, worse, pins the mount. Dnotify is therefore infeasible | 89 | the file and thus, worse, pins the mount. Dnotify is therefore infeasible |
77 | for use on a desktop system with removable media as the media cannot be | 90 | for use on a desktop system with removable media as the media cannot be |
78 | unmounted. | 91 | unmounted. Watching a file should not require that it be open. |
79 | 92 | ||
80 | Q: What is the design decision behind using an-fd-per-device as opposed to | 93 | Q: What is the design decision behind using an-fd-per-instance as opposed to |
81 | an fd-per-watch? | 94 | an fd-per-watch? |
82 | 95 | ||
83 | A: An fd-per-watch quickly consumes more file descriptors than are allowed, | 96 | A: An fd-per-watch quickly consumes more file descriptors than are allowed, |
@@ -86,8 +99,8 @@ A: An fd-per-watch quickly consumes more file descriptors than are allowed, | |||
86 | can use epoll, but requiring both is a silly and extraneous requirement. | 99 | can use epoll, but requiring both is a silly and extraneous requirement. |
87 | A watch consumes less memory than an open file, separating the number | 100 | A watch consumes less memory than an open file, separating the number |
88 | spaces is thus sensible. The current design is what user-space developers | 101 | spaces is thus sensible. The current design is what user-space developers |
89 | want: Users initialize inotify, once, and add n watches, requiring but one fd | 102 | want: Users initialize inotify, once, and add n watches, requiring but one |
90 | and no twiddling with fd limits. Initializing an inotify instance two | 103 | fd and no twiddling with fd limits. Initializing an inotify instance two |
91 | thousand times is silly. If we can implement user-space's preferences | 104 | thousand times is silly. If we can implement user-space's preferences |
92 | cleanly--and we can, the idr layer makes stuff like this trivial--then we | 105 | cleanly--and we can, the idr layer makes stuff like this trivial--then we |
93 | should. | 106 | should. |
@@ -111,9 +124,6 @@ A: An fd-per-watch quickly consumes more file descriptors than are allowed, | |||
111 | example, love it. Trust me, I asked. It is not a surprise: Who'd want | 124 | example, love it. Trust me, I asked. It is not a surprise: Who'd want |
112 | to manage and block on 1000 fd's via select? | 125 | to manage and block on 1000 fd's via select? |
113 | 126 | ||
114 | - You'd have to manage the fd's, as an example: Call close() when you | ||
115 | received a delete event. | ||
116 | |||
117 | - No way to get out of band data. | 127 | - No way to get out of band data. |
118 | 128 | ||
119 | - 1024 is still too low. ;-) | 129 | - 1024 is still too low. ;-) |
@@ -122,6 +132,11 @@ A: An fd-per-watch quickly consumes more file descriptors than are allowed, | |||
122 | scales to 1000s of directories, juggling 1000s of fd's just does not seem | 132 | scales to 1000s of directories, juggling 1000s of fd's just does not seem |
123 | the right interface. It is too heavy. | 133 | the right interface. It is too heavy. |
124 | 134 | ||
135 | Additionally, it _is_ possible to more than one instance and | ||
136 | juggle more than one queue and thus more than one associated fd. There | ||
137 | need not be a one-fd-per-process mapping; it is one-fd-per-queue and a | ||
138 | process can easily want more than one queue. | ||
139 | |||
125 | Q: Why the system call approach? | 140 | Q: Why the system call approach? |
126 | 141 | ||
127 | A: The poor user-space interface is the second biggest problem with dnotify. | 142 | A: The poor user-space interface is the second biggest problem with dnotify. |
@@ -131,8 +146,6 @@ A: The poor user-space interface is the second biggest problem with dnotify. | |||
131 | Obtaining the fd and managing the watches could have been done either via a | 146 | Obtaining the fd and managing the watches could have been done either via a |
132 | device file or a family of new system calls. We decided to implement a | 147 | device file or a family of new system calls. We decided to implement a |
133 | family of system calls because that is the preffered approach for new kernel | 148 | family of system calls because that is the preffered approach for new kernel |
134 | features and it means our user interface requirements. | 149 | interfaces. The only real difference was whether we wanted to use open(2) |
135 | 150 | and ioctl(2) or a couple of new system calls. System calls beat ioctls. | |
136 | Additionally, it _is_ possible to more than one instance and | ||
137 | juggle more than one queue and thus more than one associated fd. | ||
138 | 151 | ||