Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:25:04 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>
To: Linda Walsh <lkml@tlinx.org>
Cc: Linux-Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: max symlink = 5? ?bug? ?feature deficit?
Message-ID: <20060212212504.GX27946@ftp.linux.org.uk>
References: <43ED5A7B.7040908@tlinx.org> <20060212180601.GU27946@ftp.linux.org.uk> <43EFA63B.30907@tlinx.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <43EFA63B.30907@tlinx.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 839
Lines: 18

On Sun, Feb 12, 2006 at 01:18:51PM -0800, Linda Walsh wrote:
> Al Viro wrote:
> >>Should it be something like Glib's '20' or '255'?
> >>    
> >	20 or 255 - not feasible (we'll get stack overflow from hell).
> >  
> How much stack is used/iteration?  It appears we have a local pointer in
> __do_follow_link, and 2 passed parameters/call + call-returns ->5
> pointers/iteration.  "Forty" entries would seem to take 200 pointers or
> 800 bytes of stack space?  A limit of 20 would use 400 bytes?

Care to RTFS?  I mean, really - at least to the point of seeing what's
involved in that recursion.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/