Re: [CHECKER] 37 stack variables >= 1K in 2.4.17

From: Daniel Phillips (
Date: Thu Jun 13 2002 - 12:41:04 EST

On Thursday 13 June 2002 08:59, Alexander Viro wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Dawson Engler wrote:
> > > Not realistic - we have a recursion through the ->follow_link(), and
> > > a lot of stuff can be called from ->follow_link(). We _do_ have a
> > > limit on depth of recursion here, but it won't be fun to deal with.
> >
> > You mean following function pointers is not realistic? Actually the
> > function pointers in linxu are pretty easy to deal with since, by
> > and large, they are set by static structure initialization and not
> > really fussed with afterwards.
> I mean that due to the loop (link_path_walk->do_follow_link->foofs_follow_link
> ->vfs_follow_link->link_path_walk) you will get infinite maximal depth
> for everything that can be called by any of these functions. And that's
> a _lot_ of stuff.

Then at the point of recursion a dynamic check for stack space is
needed, and [checker]'s role would be to determine the deepest static
depth, to plug into the stack check. If we want to be sure about
stack integrity there isn't any way around this.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jun 15 2002 - 22:00:29 EST