On Mon, Jul 14, 2025 at 8:04 AM Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 14, 2025 at 10:24:11AM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 12, 2025 at 06:38:33AM +0000, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote: > > > From: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2025 06:41:57 +0100 > > > > Once unix_sock ->path is set, we are guaranteed that its ->path will remain > > > > unchanged (and pinned) until the socket is closed. OTOH, dentry_open() > > > > does not modify the path passed to it. > > > > > > > > IOW, there's no need to copy unix_sk(sk)->path in unix_open_file() - we > > > > can just pass it to dentry_open() and be done with that. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Sounds good. I confirmed vfs_open() copies the passed const path ptr. > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > I can just throw that into the SCM_PIDFD branch? > > Fine by me; the thing is, I don't have anything else in the area at the moment > (and won't until -rc1 - CLASS(get_unused_fd) series will stray there, but > it's not settled enough yet, so it's definitely the next cycle fodder). > > So if you (or netdev folks) already have anything going on in the af_unix.c, > I've no problem with that thing going there. AFAIK, there's no conflicting changes around unix_open_file() in net-next, and this is more of vfs stuff, so whichever is fine to me.
