--- /dev/null
+ inotify
+ a powerful yet simple file change notification system
+
+
+
+Document started 15 Mar 2005 by Robert Love <rml@novell.com>
+
+
+(i) User Interface
+
+Inotify is controlled by a set of three system calls and normal file I/O on a
+returned file descriptor.
+
+First step in using inotify is to initialise an inotify instance:
+
+ int fd = inotify_init ();
+
+Each instance is associated with a unique, ordered queue.
+
+Change events are managed by "watches". A watch is an (object,mask) pair where
+the object is a file or directory and the mask is a bit mask of one or more
+inotify events that the application wishes to receive. See <linux/inotify.h>
+for valid events. A watch is referenced by a watch descriptor, or wd.
+
+Watches are added via a path to the file.
+
+Watches on a directory will return events on any files inside of the directory.
+
+Adding a watch is simple:
+
+ int wd = inotify_add_watch (fd, path, mask);
+
+Where "fd" is the return value from inotify_init(), path is the path to the
+object to watch, and mask is the watch mask (see <linux/inotify.h>).
+
+You can update an existing watch in the same manner, by passing in a new mask.
+
+An existing watch is removed via
+
+ int ret = inotify_rm_watch (fd, wd);
+
+Events are provided in the form of an inotify_event structure that is read(2)
+from a given inotify instance. The filename is of dynamic length and follows
+the struct. It is of size len. The filename is padded with null bytes to
+ensure proper alignment. This padding is reflected in len.
+
+You can slurp multiple events by passing a large buffer, for example
+
+ size_t len = read (fd, buf, BUF_LEN);
+
+Where "buf" is a pointer to an array of "inotify_event" structures at least
+BUF_LEN bytes in size. The above example will return as many events as are
+available and fit in BUF_LEN.
+
+Each inotify instance fd is also select()- and poll()-able.
+
+You can find the size of the current event queue via the standard FIONREAD
+ioctl on the fd returned by inotify_init().
+
+All watches are destroyed and cleaned up on close.
+
+
+(ii)
+
+Prototypes:
+
+ int inotify_init (void);
+ int inotify_add_watch (int fd, const char *path, __u32 mask);
+ int inotify_rm_watch (int fd, __u32 mask);
+
+
+(iii) Internal Kernel Implementation
+
+Each inotify instance is associated with an inotify_device structure.
+
+Each watch is associated with an inotify_watch structure. Watches are chained
+off of each associated device and each associated inode.
+
+See fs/inotify.c for the locking and lifetime rules.
+
+
+(iv) Rationale
+
+Q: What is the design decision behind not tying the watch to the open fd of
+ the watched object?
+
+A: Watches are associated with an open inotify device, not an open file.
+ This solves the primary problem with dnotify: keeping the file open pins
+ the file and thus, worse, pins the mount. Dnotify is therefore infeasible
+ for use on a desktop system with removable media as the media cannot be
+ unmounted. Watching a file should not require that it be open.
+
+Q: What is the design decision behind using an-fd-per-instance as opposed to
+ an fd-per-watch?
+
+A: An fd-per-watch quickly consumes more file descriptors than are allowed,
+ more fd's than are feasible to manage, and more fd's than are optimally
+ select()-able. Yes, root can bump the per-process fd limit and yes, users
+ can use epoll, but requiring both is a silly and extraneous requirement.
+ A watch consumes less memory than an open file, separating the number
+ spaces is thus sensible. The current design is what user-space developers
+ want: Users initialize inotify, once, and add n watches, requiring but one
+ fd and no twiddling with fd limits. Initializing an inotify instance two
+ thousand times is silly. If we can implement user-space's preferences
+ cleanly--and we can, the idr layer makes stuff like this trivial--then we
+ should.
+
+ There are other good arguments. With a single fd, there is a single
+ item to block on, which is mapped to a single queue of events. The single
+ fd returns all watch events and also any potential out-of-band data. If
+ every fd was a separate watch,
+
+ - There would be no way to get event ordering. Events on file foo and
+ file bar would pop poll() on both fd's, but there would be no way to tell
+ which happened first. A single queue trivially gives you ordering. Such
+ ordering is crucial to existing applications such as Beagle. Imagine
+ "mv a b ; mv b a" events without ordering.
+
+ - We'd have to maintain n fd's and n internal queues with state,
+ versus just one. It is a lot messier in the kernel. A single, linear
+ queue is the data structure that makes sense.
+
+ - User-space developers prefer the current API. The Beagle guys, for
+ example, love it. Trust me, I asked. It is not a surprise: Who'd want
+ to manage and block on 1000 fd's via select?
+
+ - No way to get out of band data.
+
+ - 1024 is still too low. ;-)
+
+ When you talk about designing a file change notification system that
+ scales to 1000s of directories, juggling 1000s of fd's just does not seem
+ the right interface. It is too heavy.
+
+ Additionally, it _is_ possible to more than one instance and
+ juggle more than one queue and thus more than one associated fd. There
+ need not be a one-fd-per-process mapping; it is one-fd-per-queue and a
+ process can easily want more than one queue.
+
+Q: Why the system call approach?
+
+A: The poor user-space interface is the second biggest problem with dnotify.
+ Signals are a terrible, terrible interface for file notification. Or for
+ anything, for that matter. The ideal solution, from all perspectives, is a
+ file descriptor-based one that allows basic file I/O and poll/select.
+ Obtaining the fd and managing the watches could have been done either via a
+ device file or a family of new system calls. We decided to implement a
+ family of system calls because that is the preffered approach for new kernel
+ interfaces. The only real difference was whether we wanted to use open(2)
+ and ioctl(2) or a couple of new system calls. System calls beat ioctls.
+
git://git.onelab.eu / linux-2.6.git / blobdiff