linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 1/3] fs: introduce helper d_path

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <m18s4mzhrz.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>
Date:   Mon, 10 May 2021 11:16:00 -0500
From:   ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Jia He <justin.he@....com>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>,
        Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
        "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
        "Peter Zijlstra \(Intel\)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
        Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...gle.com>,
        "Ahmed S. Darwish" <a.darwish@...utronix.de>,
        "open list\:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/3] fs: introduce helper d_path_fast()

Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> writes:
>
> Another thing that keeps bugging me about prepend_path() is the
> set of return values.  I mean, 0/1/2/3/-ENAMETOOLONG, and all
> except 0 are unlikely?  Might as well make that 0/1/2/3/-1, if
> not an outright 0/1/2/3/4.  And prepend() could return bool, while
> we are at it (true - success, false - overflow)...

I remember seeing that the different callers of prepend_path treated
those different cases differently.

But now that I look again the return value 3 (escaped) gets lumped
together with 2(detached).


On second look it appears that the two patterns that we actually have
are basically:

char *__d_path(const struct path *path,
	       const struct path *root,
	       char *buf, int buflen)
{
	error = prepend_path(path, root, &res, &buflen);

	if (error < 0)
		return ERR_PTR(error);
	if (error > 0)
		return NULL;
	return res;
}

char *d_absolute_path(const struct path *path,
	       char *buf, int buflen)
{
	error = prepend_path(path, &root, &res, &buflen);

	if (error > 1)
		error = -EINVAL;
	if (error < 0)
		return ERR_PTR(error);
	return res;
}

With d_absolute_path deciding that return value 1 absolute is not an
error.

That does look like there is plenty of room to refactor and make things
clearer.


Eric