X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<43FC8F9C.B3308DA8@dessent.net>
Date:	Wed, 22 Feb 2006 08:21:48 -0800
From:	Brian Dessent <brian AT dessent DOT net>
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	Cygwin List <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject:	Re: another instance of .. issues
References:	<022220061600 DOT 18471 DOT 43FC8AA2000A6AE70000482722073007930A050E040D0C079D0A AT comcast DOT net>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

Eric Blake wrote:

> and/or have openat() implemented directly in cygwin so that the
> openat emulation of open("/proc/self/fd/4/..") is avoided (not to
> mention more efficient by avoiding several other syscalls during
> the emulation).

I think implementing openat() directly would be the clear win here,
since the ".." processing seems to be such a landmine.  Of course
without a patch this is just hot air on my part.

Brian

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -