lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Mar]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: Have RESOLVE_* flags superseded AT_* flags for new syscalls?
Date
Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com> wrote:

> I think we settled this and can agree on RESOLVE_NO_SYMLINKS being the
> right thing to do, i.e. not resolving symlinks will stay opt-in.
> Or is your worry even with the current semantics of openat2()? I don't
> see the issue since O_NOFOLLOW still works with openat2().

Say, for example, my home dir is on a network volume somewhere and /home has a
symlink pointing to it. RESOLVE_NO_SYMLINKS cannot be used to access a file
inside my homedir if the pathwalk would go through /home/dhowells - this would
affect fsinfo() - so RESOLVE_NO_SYMLINKS is not a substitute for
AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW (O_NOFOLLOW would not come into it).

David

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-03-02 15:51    [W:0.077 / U:0.528 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site