From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 22:57:14 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [patch] remove MAX_ARG_PAGES Message-ID: <20061229215714.GA21694@elte.hu> References: <65dd6fd50610101705t3db93a72sc0847cd120aa05d3@mail.gmail.com> <1160572460.2006.79.camel@taijtu> <65dd6fd50610111448q7ff210e1nb5f14917c311c8d4@mail.gmail.com> <65dd6fd50610241048h24af39d9ob49c3816dfe1ca64@mail.gmail.com> <20061229200357.GA5940@elte.hu> <20061229204904.GI20596@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20061229204904.GI20596@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Russell King Cc: Ollie Wild , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org, Linus Torvalds , Arjan van de Ven , linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , Andi Kleen , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, David Howells , Peter Zijlstra List-ID: * Russell King wrote: > On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 09:03:57PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > FYI, i have forward ported your MAX_ARG_PAGES limit removal patch to > > 2.6.20-rc2 and have included it in the -rt kernel. It's working great - > > i can now finally do a "ls -t patches/*.patch" in my patch repository - > > something i havent been able to do for years ;-) > > How do the various autoconf stuff react to this? Eg, I notice the > following in various configure scripts: > > checking the maximum length of command line arguments... 32768 yes, that's how libtool works, it goes from 32K downwards to figure out a maximum. I dont see a problem there. you can find a few other variants at: http://www.google.com/codesearch?q=%22checking+the+maximum+length+of+command+line+arguments%22&hl=en&btnG=Search+Code worst-case the test-command would get a segfault from the default stack limit. (8MB on Fedora) Ingo -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org