[lkml]   [2011]   [Mar]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [git pull] VFS - the first pile
    On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 09:07:28AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
    > On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 07:46:40AM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
    > >
    > > On Mar 16, 2011, at 3:21 AM, Al Viro wrote:
    > >
    > > > BTW, you want to update 005 in there - we are back to correct "maximum
    > > > is 40 symlinks total, 8 levels on nesting" for all syscalls. Add the
    > > > 41st symlink to your chain in testcase ;-)
    > >
    > > Unless there's a way to read out these limits, I'm not sure it's a good idea
    > > to add a test like that to xfstests --- it's too fragile since at some point
    > > we might change what those limits might be.
    > >
    > > Also, xfstests is primarily intended to be a file system level stress tester
    > > testing for correctness, and issues of whether we blow up on the 40th,
    > > 41st, or 42nd symlink seems more like an ABI issue --- and even there I'm
    > > not sure the ABI specification should be quite that detailed over what's
    > > allowed and not allowed.
    > That's not what it tests anyway. It tests that we get ELOOP at some
    > point, and do not blow the stack. Which is someting that older Linux
    > code used to do.

    Yes. See patch upthread (or in for-linus). There are two parts in that
    test; *both* would actually trigger the b0rkage in the last commit of
    what got merged - the only reason why the first one (long chain) did not
    was that the limit got fixed and -ELOOP was no longer triggered. Symlink
    to itself did, of course, trigger it - complete with oops.

     \ /
      Last update: 2011-03-16 14:17    [W:0.019 / U:123.088 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site