|
Message-ID: <Ye14mRvLsnrqUF3a@pirotess> Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2022 16:47:37 +0100 From: Ismael Luceno <ismael@...ev.co.uk> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] nftw: implement FTW_CHDIR On 22/Jan/2022 16:50, Markus Wichmann wrote: > On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 03:51:58PM +0100, Ismael Luceno wrote: > > @@ -133,9 +136,16 @@ int nftw(const char *path, int (*fn)(const char *, const struct stat *, int, str > > } > > memcpy(pathbuf, path, l+1); > > > > + if (flags & FTW_CHDIR) > > + orig_dfd = open(".", O_CLOEXEC | O_PATH); > > + > > pthread_setcancelstate(PTHREAD_CANCEL_DISABLE, &cs); > > r = do_nftw(pathbuf, fn, fd_limit, flags, NULL); > > pthread_setcancelstate(cs, 0); > > + if (flags & FTW_CHDIR) { > > + fchdir(orig_dfd); > > + close(orig_dfd); > > + } > > return r; > > } > > > > -- > > 2.33.0 > > > > Erm... maybe a dumb question, but what if either the open() or the > fchdir() fails? Is anything specified for that case? Is effectively > ignoring FTW_CHDIR OK in that case or would you have to signal failure? > I mean, I see that there is not much you can do in either case, but to > just fail silently seems wrong to me. Ah, indeed. I'll try to address that.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.