From: Jonny Grant <jg@jguk.org>
To: Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com>, Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>,
Xi Ruoyao <xry111@mengyan1223.wang>
Cc: gcc-help <gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Recursive SIGSEGV question
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2019 16:13:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <414d9c27-ee18-68c0-edf9-28aaf878ff34@jguk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <95ff2a72-47fb-5cc3-5852-08517e3ce76e@redhat.com>
On 25/03/2019 15:47, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 3/25/19 2:01 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Xi Ruoyao:
>>
>>> On 2019-03-25 13:06 +0000, Jonny Grant wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I built & ran with the Sanitizer, it seems it's also stack overflow
>>>> within the operator new()
>>>>
>>>> I had thoughts GCC would generate code that monitored the stack size and
>>>> aborted with a clear message when the stack size was exceeded. Looked
>>>> online, and it doesn't seem to be the case.
>>>
>>> Impossible. We can't distinguish "stack overflow" with other segmentation
>>> faults.
>>
>> I think “impossible†is too strong.
>
> It is. We do it with stack banging and a few guard pages in the HotSpot JVM.
> The problem is that recovering well enough to throw an exception requires
> some quite hairy non-portable code.
Sounds good!
I had expected that GCC (eg on x86) generated code just kept track of
the base and max SP register, and so would easily be able to call
abort() and printf "Stack %zu limit reached - Abort\n".
I can see it would be an overhead, and difficult to recover well enough
to abort() after a message.
Jonny
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-25 16:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-19 22:05 Jonny Grant
2019-03-20 4:02 ` Florian Weimer
2019-03-20 8:11 ` Jonny Grant
2019-03-25 13:23 ` Jonny Grant
2019-03-25 13:27 ` Jonathan Wakely
2019-03-25 13:56 ` Florian Weimer
2019-03-25 14:01 ` Xi Ruoyao
2019-03-25 15:47 ` Florian Weimer
2019-03-25 16:10 ` Andrew Haley
2019-03-25 16:13 ` Jonny Grant [this message]
2019-03-25 16:23 ` Jonathan Wakely
2019-03-25 18:51 ` Florian Weimer
2019-03-25 20:39 ` Jonny Grant
2019-03-26 6:50 ` Xi Ruoyao
2019-03-27 0:29 ` Jonathan Wakely
2019-03-27 21:34 ` Jonny Grant
2019-03-27 23:43 ` Jonathan Wakely
2019-03-27 23:51 ` Jonny Grant
2019-03-28 8:26 ` Xi Ruoyao
2019-03-28 11:52 ` Jonathan Wakely
2019-03-29 2:24 ` Jonny Grant
2019-03-30 17:32 ` Jonny Grant
2023-02-19 21:21 ` Jonny Grant
2023-02-19 21:34 ` Jonny Grant
2019-03-28 13:55 ` Jonathan Wakely
2019-03-28 14:39 ` Jonny Grant
2019-03-28 14:39 ` Jonathan Wakely
2019-03-25 20:28 ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-03-25 18:56 ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-03-25 22:05 ` Jonny Grant
2019-03-26 10:20 ` Xi Ruoyao
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=414d9c27-ee18-68c0-edf9-28aaf878ff34@jguk.org \
--to=jg@jguk.org \
--cc=aph@redhat.com \
--cc=fw@deneb.enyo.de \
--cc=gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=xry111@mengyan1223.wang \
/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).