Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 19 Jun 2002 03:12:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 19 Jun 2002 03:12:46 -0400 Received: from holomorphy.com ([66.224.33.161]:5816 "EHLO holomorphy") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 19 Jun 2002 03:12:44 -0400 Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 00:12:10 -0700 From: William Lee Irwin III To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl, Alexander Viro , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH+discussion] symlink recursion Message-ID: <20020619071210.GG25360@holomorphy.com> Mail-Followup-To: William Lee Irwin III , Linus Torvalds , Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl, Alexander Viro , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Description: brief message Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.25i Organization: The Domain of Holomorphy Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 860 Lines: 20 On Tue, Jun 18, 2002 at 04:57:06PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > I see no advantages to handling it by hand, since this isn't even a very > deep recursion, and since even if you do the recursive part by hand by a > linked list you still need to limit the depth _anyway_ to avoid DoS > attacks. I see one: the space consumed by the explicitly managed stack is known and control may be exerted over it. Also, the stack space consumed by procedure calls is great enough on various non-x86 cpus to make even shallow recursions problematic (ISTR 96B-120B/call with a 4KB page in some prior discussions). Cheers, Bill - 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/