From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Al Viro Subject: Re: max symlink = 5? ?bug? ?feature deficit? Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:25:04 +0000 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 Cc: Linux-Kernel , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:25047 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751448AbWBLVZF (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Feb 2006 16:25:05 -0500 To: Linda Walsh Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <43EFA63B.30907@tlinx.org> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org 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.