On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 03:39:47PM GMT, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 4:59 AM Xi Ruoyao <xry111@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 2024-06-25 at 17:18 +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> > > + if ((sx->flags & (AT_EMPTY_PATH | AT_STATX_SYNC_TYPE)) ==
> > > + (AT_EMPTY_PATH | AT_STATX_SYNC_TYPE) &&
> > > + vfs_empty_path(sx->dfd, path)) {
> > > sx->filename = NULL;
> > > - return ret;
> >
> > AT_STATX_SYNC_TYPE == AT_STATX_FORCE_SYNC | AT_STATX_DONT_SYNC but
> > AT_STATX_FORCE_SYNC and AT_STATX_DONT_SYNC obviously contradicts with
> > each other. Thus valid uses of statx won't satisfy this condition.
> >
>
> I don't know wtf I was thinking, this is indeed bogus.
>
> > And I guess the condition here should be same as the condition in
> > SYSCALL_DEFINE5(statx) or am I wrong?
> >
>
> That I disagree with. The AUTOMOUNT thing is a glibc-local problem for
> fstatat. Unless if you mean the if should be of similar sort modulo
> the flag. :)
>
> I am going to fix this up and write a io_uring testcase, then submit a
> v4. Maybe today or tomorrow.
Fwiw, I had already dropped the io_uring bits when I pushed to
#vfs.mount. So just put that as a separate patch on top.
