public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libstdc++/64535] Emergency buffer for exception allocation too small
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 12:39:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-64535-4-7KClPGfiOI@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-64535-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64535

--- Comment #24 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to rguenther@suse.de from comment #23)
> Is there a non-zeroed .bss section?

No.

> I think using dynamically allocated
> memory might be cheaper.

I very much doubt it.

> > That way "freeing" that would be handled in most cases.  And I assume you
> > really can't dlclose libstdc++ while other threads are handling exceptions,
> > because then those libraries should use libstdc++ entry points and either would
> > need to be dlclosed too, or libstdc++ wouldn't be really unmapped.
> 
> Ok, so what's the real issue then with the destructor?  Don't we destroy
> the global IO and locale stuff as well?

IO destruction is a huge can of worms, just look at some of the interesting
glibc bugs.  It is an area which is essentially unsolvable.
Most other stuff isn't destructed by glibc at all, there is __libc_freeres
exactly to make valgrind/mtrace etc. happy, but still not free otherwise.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-01-27 12:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-01-08  9:43 [Bug libstdc++/64535] New: " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-08 11:11 ` [Bug libstdc++/64535] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-08 11:27 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-08 11:39 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-08 11:57 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-08 12:48 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-09  8:44 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-09  9:01 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-12 10:03 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-12 10:19 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2015-01-12 14:11 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-21 11:18 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-22  9:22 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-22  9:56 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-26 22:36 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-27 11:15 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-27 11:22 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-27 11:49 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2015-01-27 11:55 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-27 12:10 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2015-01-27 12:23 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-27 12:30 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-27 12:34 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2015-01-27 12:39 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2015-01-27 12:45 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-01-27 12:55 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2022-09-27 15:45 ` dumoulin.thibaut at gmail dot com
2022-09-27 16:05 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-64535-4-7KClPGfiOI@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).