Re: [PATCH bpf-next] libbpf: set close-on-exec flag on gzopen

[Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>]

On 08/10, Martin Kelly wrote:
> On 8/10/23 14:43, Martin Kelly wrote:
> > From: Marco Vedovati <marco.vedovati@crowdstrike.com>
> > 
> > Enable the close-on-exec flag when using gzopen
> > 
> > This is especially important for multithreaded programs making use of
> > libbpf, where a fork + exec could race with libbpf library calls,
> > potentially resulting in a file descriptor leaked to the new process.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Marco Vedovati <marco.vedovati@crowdstrike.com>
> > ---
> >   tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c | 4 ++--
> >   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
> > index 17883f5a44b9..b14a4376a86e 100644
> > --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
> > +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
> > @@ -1978,9 +1978,9 @@ static int bpf_object__read_kconfig_file(struct bpf_object *obj, void *data)
> >   		return -ENAMETOOLONG;
> >   	/* gzopen also accepts uncompressed files. */
> > -	file = gzopen(buf, "r");
> > +	file = gzopen(buf, "re");
> >   	if (!file)
> > -		file = gzopen("/proc/config.gz", "r");
> > +		file = gzopen("/proc/config.gz", "re");
> >   	if (!file) {
> >   		pr_warn("failed to open system Kconfig\n");
> 
> Sorry for double-sending the patch; the first was missing the bpf-next
> prefix and I wasn't sure if that would be an issue. Feel free to ignore this
> patch, as the other already got a reply.

Oops, I missed your resend:

https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/ZNVf6kHamI9awatB@google.com/

Next time pls at least reply to the first 'wrong' one :-)