RFC: path display and path filtering features.

Dmitry V. Levin ldv at altlinux.org
Fri Feb 18 22:44:36 UTC 2011

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
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().

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.strace.io/pipermail/strace-devel/attachments/20110219/8285fd82/attachment.bin>

More information about the Strace-devel mailing list