Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 13 Jun 2002 13:53:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 13 Jun 2002 13:53:53 -0400 Received: from leibniz.math.psu.edu ([146.186.130.2]:28383 "EHLO math.psu.edu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 13 Jun 2002 13:53:52 -0400 Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 13:53:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Alexander Viro To: Daniel Phillips cc: Dawson Engler , Benjamin LaHaise , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mc@cs.Stanford.EDU Subject: Re: [CHECKER] 37 stack variables >= 1K in 2.4.17 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > I mean that due to the loop (link_path_walk->do_follow_link->foofs_follow_link > > ->vfs_follow_link->link_path_walk) you will get infinite maximal depth > > for everything that can be called by any of these functions. And that's > > a _lot_ of stuff. > > Then at the point of recursion a dynamic check for stack space is > needed, and [checker]'s role would be to determine the deepest static > depth, to plug into the stack check. If we want to be sure about > stack integrity there isn't any way around this. Wrong. Check for stack _space_ will mean that maximal depth of nested symlinks depends on syscall. Definitely not what you want to see. There is a static limit (no more than 5 nested), but it must be explicitly known to checker - deducing it from code is easy for a human, but hopeless for anything automatic. - 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/