From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752754Ab1CPNHq (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:07:46 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:59392 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751501Ab1CPNHj (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:07:39 -0400 Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:07:28 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Theodore Tso Cc: Al Viro , Dave Chinner , Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [git pull] VFS - the first pile Message-ID: <20110316130728.GB30866@infradead.org> References: <20110315213248.GL22723@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20110316061917.GA30195@dastard> <20110316065103.GP22723@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20110316072123.GR22723@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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.