Re: [XEN RFC for-4.14] Re: use of "stat -"

[Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [XEN RFC for-4.14] Re: use of "stat -""):
> I'm about to test this then, but to be honest I have no idea what
> to do with the comment. I don't think I could properly justify its
> deletion in the description (beyond saying it's not really true),
> nor would I be certain whether to e.g. leave the test -ef part
> there.

You should delete the comment.  You could replace it with its
opposite.  Something like:

 # Although /dev/stdin (ie /proc/self/fd/0) looks like a symlink,
 # stat(2) bypasses the synthetic symlink and directly accesses the
 # underlying open-file.  So this works correctly even if the file
 # has been renamed or unlinked.

> Also is there any reason to go through two symlinks then, rather
> than using /proc/self/fd/$_lockfd directly?

/dev/stdin is clearer, to my mind.

(The tiny performence difference is not relevant here.  It's also
possible that at some point stat(1) might handle it specially.)

Thanks,
Ian.