Messages in this thread | | | From | <> (peeter joot) | Subject | Re: Should we have MAXSYMLINKS? | Date | Fri, 15 Jan 1999 06:56:17 -0500 (EST) |
| |
> > It is an unsafe patch (ie: I coded up a sysctl to raise it at run > > time), and we have to live with the fact that this could > > potentially cause kernel stack to run out if we raise it too high > > -- not very good, but we don't really have an option if we want to > > build on Linux:( > > If only root and set this sysctl (as one would expect), I don't think > it's a problem. You might want to submit this in the hope it goes if > for 2.2.x -- otherwise we'll just have to manually change the limit > of 5 to 20 or something.
It can be set only as root, and I had originally posted it when I first coded it up. It was not accepted because it was dangerous and the proper fix was to eliminate the recursion.
I could repost it, but I think it would likely not be accepted for the same reason.
By CC to the kernel mailing list: It should be noted that the defacto "solution" that people have for this problem is to aribrarily raise the constant from 5 to something higher than 5 (like 8 or 10 in our case). This is pretty easy to do now even without a sysctl because it now only has to be changed in one place, but it does require a recompile. Although a sysctl for the ELOOP limit of 5 is dangerous it is an acceptable workaround in many cases for a problem that is not likely to be fixed any time soon.
Peeter -- Peeter Joot peeterj@ca.ibm.com IBM DB2 Operating System Services 416-448-3359 (tie line 778)
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |