Re: [PATCH 1/6] add open_nofollow() helper

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Feb 16, 2021, 14:54 UTC
Message-ID: <YCvcoPnDAEWNcv+h@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <YCvaRpQs99TBaCrQ@coredump.intra.peff.net>

On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 09:44:23AM -0500, Jeff King wrote:

Show 15 quoted lines

>   - we can determine whether the path is a symlink with lstat().
> 
>     This is slower (two syscalls instead of one), but that may be
>     acceptable for infrequent uses like looking up .gitattributes files
>     (especially because we can get away with a single syscall for the
>     common case of ENOENT).
> 
>     It's also racy, but should be sufficient for our needs (we are
>     worried about in-tree symlinks that we ourselves would have
>     previously created). We could make it non-racy at the cost of making
>     it even slower, by doing an fstat() on the opened descriptor and
>     comparing the dev/ino fields to the original lstat().
> 
> This patch implements the lstat() option in its slightly-faster racy
> form.

I manually compared the performance of the O_NOFOLLOW and fallback paths by running:

  git ls-files | git check-attr --stdin -a

on linux.git, which would try to look at quite a few in-tree attribute files. The slowdown didn't seem measurable (in fact, the fallback seems about 1% faster even over many trials, but I think it's just noise). Both take ~50ms.

Which makes sense, because there's only one .gitattributes file, so most of the lookups are hitting ENOENT on the lstat() and not even calling open(). If I do:

  find * -type d | sed 's,$,/.gitattributes,' | xargs touch

then the O_NOFOLLOW case takes ~54ms (which makes sense; we're opening a bunch of extra empty attribute files), and the fallback case goes to ~56ms. So the difference becomes measurable, but I wonder if it's worth even caring about. That's 2ms on a pathological case. I'd even be tempted to implement the non-racy version with the extra fstat(). I don't think we need it, but just as a least-surprise thing.

This is all on Linux, of course. Perhaps other systems with slower syscalls may be more impacted.

-Peff