On Mon 2007-06-04 13:25:30, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> On Monday 04 June 2007 12:55, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Wed 2007-05-23 18:16:45, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 15 May 2007 11:14, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > Why is this configurable?
> > >
> > > The maximum length of a pathname is an arbitrary limit: we don't want to
> > > allocate arbitrary amounts of of kernel memory for pathnames so we
> > > introduce this limit and set it to a reasonable value. In the unlikely
> > > case that someone uses insanely long pathnames, this limit can be
> > > increased.
> >
> > vfs does not have configurable pathname limit, and I do not see what
> > is so special about AA to require this kind of uglyness.
>
> You very well know that the vfs has a limit of PATH_MAX characters (4096) for
> pathnames. This means that at most that many characters can be passed at
> once.
Sorry then. Why not reuse the PATH_MAX when it exists already?
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
