On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 3:30 PM Noah Goldstein <goldstein....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 3:10 PM Richard Henderson
> <richard.hender...@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > On 11/6/24 18:13, Noah Goldstein wrote:
> > > Question about impl regarding handling of `-execfd` with/without a
> > > program name.
> > >
> > > 1) `-execfd` + program name ie: `qemu -execfd <some_fd> ls -a`.
> > > 2) `-execfd` without program name i.e: `qemu -execfd <some_fd> -a`.
> > >
> > > Do you want to allow both of these? If you want to allow (1), what should
> > > we use for `argv[0]`/`exec_path`. The program pass ("ls") or
> > > `readlink(<some_fd>)`?
> >
> > The canonical response is, examine the kernel source.
> > We're not implementing this in a vacuum, you're replicating execveat(2).
> >
> > I suspect the answer is (1), to be compared with
> >
> > syscall(__NR_execveat, some_fd, "", &["ls", "-a"], env, AT_EMPTY_PATH);
>
> Err, I think the reference for '-execfd' is `fexecve`:
> https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man3/fexecve.3.html
>
> Which doesn't take a path. So I guess we just interpret the "ls" as
> argv[0] but not
> as "exec_path".
One more point, what should the behavior be if we have
AT_EXECFD from binfmt-misc?
> >
> >
> > r~
