On Sun, Sep 03, 2023 at 11:18:44PM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > On 9/3/23, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sun, 3 Sept 2023 at 14:06, Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> I don't think it is *that* bad. I did a quick sanity check on that > >> front by rolling with bpftrace on cases which pass AT_EMPTY_PATH *and* > >> provide a path. > > > > I guess you are right - nobody sane would use AT_EMPTY_PATH except if > > they don't have a path. > > > > Of course, the only reason we're discussing this in the first place is > > because people are doing insane things, which makes _that_ particular > > argument very weak indeed... > > > > I put blame on whoever allowed non-NULL path and AT_EMPTY_PATH as a > valid combination, forcing the user buf to be accessed no matter what. > But I'm not going to go digging for names. ;) ITYM s/allowed/mandated/ - AT_EMPTY_PATH with NULL is -EFAULT.
