On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 05:03:38PM +0000, Grant Edwards wrote: [...] > Do we still need to do something to deal with the symlink vs. > canonical question for syscalls like stat()?
We could canonicalize absolute pathname arguments. We even could canonicalize relative pathname arguments using /proc/$pid/cwd. But I'm not sure now whether we really need this or not. > Should we try to handle syscalls like faccessat() where the file is > specified by a (fd,relative-path) tuple? We could implement a simple check, e.g. concatenate getpath(fd) with relative-path (or if fd == AT_FDCWD, readlink(/proc/$pid/cwd) with relative-path), and try to match this concatenation. But whether we need to match against canonicalized concatenation, I cannot say now. BTW, print_dirfd() should use printfd(). -- ldv
pgp8032T1Ztjq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE: Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen. Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle. Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb
_______________________________________________ Strace-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/strace-devel
