Re: [GIT PULL] notification: including fanotify

From: Linus Torvalds
Date: Sat Feb 27 2010 - 16:30:21 EST




On Fri, 26 Feb 2010, Eric Paris wrote:
>
> This tree has the part of the notification changes which have existed
> for better than a year in linux-next. They finish the inotify->fsnotify
> transition and rip out the old inotify in-kernel interface. It
> implements fanotify as a notifier only.

I was going to pull this, but

(a) that "notifier only" part seems to be incorrect. It has at least the
Kconfig part of the "let's also allow fanotify to do security
checks.

(b) the compile has obviously never been tested with any modern gcc
version. I get tons of warnings after the pull, like

In file included from fs/notify/fsnotify.h:6,
from fs/notify/fsnotify.c:28:
include/linux/fsnotify.h: In function âfsnotify_oldname_initâ:
include/linux/fsnotify.h:313: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 1 of âkstrdupâ differ in signedness
include/linux/string.h:118: note: expected âconst char *â but argument is of type âconst unsigned char *â
include/linux/fsnotify.h:313: warning: pointer targets in return differ in signedness
In file included from fs/notify/fsnotify.h:6,
from fs/notify/group.c:28:

which is totally unacceptable. I'm not going to merge code that adds
warnings like these. You can argue whether the warning is really
something gcc should warn about or not, but it really doesn't matter.

Adding lots of noisy warnings is unacceptable, and I'm upset that you
even pushed something to me with apparently _zero_ testing (or a total
disregard for a clean compile).

Grr.

Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/