From: hooanon05@yahoo.co.jp
Subject: Re: [RFC Aufs2 #2 21/28] aufs sysfs entries 
To: Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@ioremap.net>
Cc: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <20090317103923.GA4630@ioremap.net>
References: <1237188040-11404-1-git-send-email-hooanon05@yahoo.co.jp> <1237188040-11404-22-git-send-email-hooanon05@yahoo.co.jp> <20090316180538.GA7069@kroah.com> <7200.1237260402@jrobl> <20090317033747.GA17037@kroah.com> <7974.1237262747@jrobl> <20090317103923.GA4630@ioremap.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 21:56:11 +0900
Message-ID: <13217.1237294571@jrobl>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1032
Lines: 26


Evgeniy Polyakov:
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 01:05:47PM +0900, hooanon05@yahoo.co.jp (hooanon05@yahoo.co.jp) wrote:
> > Is the limit of PATH_MAX applied to the absolute path too?
> 
> No, only path used in the given operation (related or absolute) is
> limited. If related path is converted into the absolute just for the
> purpose of dump and not to be used in some syscall, it can have any
> length, so you may need to rethink which pathes are presented in sysfs
> and what should be moved outside.

As a result, current code is implemented.
- aufs entries under sysfs print the absolute path.
- sets limit (PAGE_SIZE) to its length.
- and I think it is enough.

Theoretically, every entries under procfs (or sysfs?) which contains the
absolute path have this problem.


J. R. Okajima
--
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/