[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3b42c80c3be4f583b4e7fe5f04015b0e8d39d73f.camel@xry111.site>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2024 21:02:11 +0800
From: Xi Ruoyao <xry111@...111.site>
To: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@...il.com>
Cc: brauner@...nel.org, Miao Wang <shankerwangmiao@...il.com>,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, jack@...e.cz, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, io-uring@...r.kernel.org, axboe@...nel.dk,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, loongarch@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] vfs: support statx(..., NULL, AT_EMPTY_PATH, ...)
On Wed, 2024-09-25 at 17:56 +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 4:30 PM Xi Ruoyao <xry111@...111.site> wrote:
> > There's a special case, AT_FDCWD + NULL + AT_EMPTY_PATH, still resulting
> > EFAULT, while AT_FDCWD + "" + AT_EMPTY_PATH is OK (returning the stat of
> > current directory).
> >
> > I know allowing NULL with AT_FDCWD won't produce any performance gain,
> > but it seems the difference would make the document of the API more
> > nasty.
> >
> > So is it acceptable to make the kernel "hide" this difference, i.e.
> > accept AT_FDCWD + NULL + AT_EMPTY_PATH as-is AT_FDCWD + "" +
> > AT_EMPTY_PATH?
> >
>
> huh, that indeed makes sense to add. kind of weird this was not sorted
> out at the time, but i'm not going to pointer a finger at myself :) so
> ACK from me as far as the idea goes
>
> I presume you can do the honors? :)
Should I use a Fixes: tag in the commit then? (I.e. should it be
backported to 6.11?)
--
Xi Ruoyao <xry111@...111.site>
School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University
Powered by blists - more mailing lists