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. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
