watch structure

[Steve Grubb]

On Tuesday 05 April 2005 11:13, Stephen Smalley wrote:
> In any event, this is not a performance-critical path, right?

Right. I'm just mentioning it now in hopes that Tim adds the additional sanity 
checks before trusting the lengths sent into the kernel.

> Question:  Would it be sane for Tim to go ahead and re-base his patch to
> the latest -mm and submit his RFC on linux-fsdevel now even before
> resolving the userspace interface issue?

I would tentatively say yes. It may take a few days to finalize the list 
watches. (Changing this structure the first step.) Hopefully, dumping the 
whole list without a path doesn't change the underlying design in any 
significant way. If dumping the whole list will change the design, we may 
need to hold off depending on what the changes involve.

-Steve