From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Evgeniy Polyakov Subject: Re: [RFC Aufs2 #2 21/28] aufs sysfs entries Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 13:39:24 +0300 Message-ID: <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> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Greg KH , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: hooanon05@yahoo.co.jp Return-path: Received: from tservice.net.ru ([195.178.208.66]:43634 "EHLO tservice.net.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756903AbZCQKja (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Mar 2009 06:39:30 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7974.1237262747@jrobl> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: 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. -- Evgeniy Polyakov