On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 02:39:43PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> >
> > What kilobyte? It's 9*4 pointers, IOW, 288 bytes total (assuming 64bit
> > box).
>
> You also said that you were going to up the recursion limit to 40.. So
> 40*3*8 bytes..
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 02:42:56PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 2:41 PM, Linus Torvalds
> wrote:
> >
> > And no, we will *never* lift the recursion limit. Not for 1kB, not for
> > 1MB. Never.
>
> Just to clarify: that's for the "remove restrictions completely".
> Upping
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 02:41:31PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> >
> > A kilobyte would suffice for 32 levels. _IF_ we go for "lift the
> > restrictions
> > on nesting completely", sure, we want to switch to (on-demand) dynamic
> > allocation.
>
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 2:41 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> And no, we will *never* lift the recursion limit. Not for 1kB, not for
> 1MB. Never.
Just to clarify: that's for the "remove restrictions completely".
Upping it to 32 or 40 would be fine. But not with allocations on the
stack.
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Al Viro wrote:
>
> A kilobyte would suffice for 32 levels. _IF_ we go for "lift the restrictions
> on nesting completely", sure, we want to switch to (on-demand) dynamic
> allocation.
And no, we will *never* lift the recursion limit. Not for 1kB, not for
1MB. Nev
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Al Viro wrote:
>
> What kilobyte? It's 9*4 pointers, IOW, 288 bytes total (assuming 64bit box).
You also said that you were going to up the recursion limit to 40.. So
40*3*8 bytes..
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubs
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 02:04:53PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> That said, you then introduce a stack-allocated "struct saved stack[]"
> in path_mountpoint[] instead, *and* nameidata is saved on stack, so
> this all ends up being very stack-intensive anyway.
>
> I might have missed some patch h
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Al Viro wrote:
> */
> static int link_path_walk(const char *name, struct nameidata *nd)
> {
> + struct saved {
> + struct path link;
> + void *cookie;
> + const char *name;
> + } stack[MAX_NESTED_LINKS], *l
8 matches
Mail list logo
