From: Jonny Grant <jg@jguk.org>
To: gcc-help <gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Cc: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>, Xi Ruoyao <xry111@mengyan1223.wang>
Subject: Re: Recursive SIGSEGV question
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2019 22:05:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e10dfb8d-9bdc-3482-9924-e707982a81ca@jguk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d3e73ef74c12829b7c827434bdebd8cfe0247c60.camel@mengyan1223.wang>
Hi!
On 25/03/2019 13:55, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> 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. For example
>
> int foo() {volatile char p[10000000]; p[0] = 1;}
>
> and
>
> int foo() {
> volatile char a;
> (&a)[-9999999] = 1;
> }
>
> may be compiled to exactly same machine code. Now which one is a stack
> overflow?
>
>> AddressSanitizer:DEADLYSIGNAL
>> =================================================================
>> ==16598==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: stack-overflow on address
>> 0x7ffe4b0e7fc0 (pc 0x7f85c609293a bp 0x7ffe4b0e88d0 sp 0x7ffe4b0e7fb0 T0)
>> #0 0x7f85c6092939 (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libasan.so.5+0x28939)
>> #1 0x7f85c6091217 (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libasan.so.5+0x27217)
>> #2 0x7f85c615974e in operator new(unsigned long)
>> (/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libasan.so.5+0xef74e)
>> #3 0x563e23701a4a in void std::__cxx11::basic_string<char,
>> std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >::_M_construct<char
>> const*>(char const*, char const*, std::forward_iterator_tag)
>> /usr/include/c++/8/bits/basic_string.tcc:219
>> #4 0x563e23947131 in void std::__cxx11::basic_string<char,
>> std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >::_M_construct_aux<char
>> const*>(char const*, char const*, std::__false_type)
>> /usr/include/c++/8/bits/basic_string.h:236
>> #5 0x563e23947131 in void std::__cxx11::basic_string<char,
>> std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >::_M_construct<char
>> const*>(char const*, char const*) /usr/include/c++/8/bits/basic_string.h:255
>> #6 0x563e23947131 in std::__cxx11::basic_string<char,
>> std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >::basic_string(char
>> const*, std::allocator<char> const&)
>> /usr/include/c++/8/bits/basic_string.h:516
>
> If you consume too much stack, stack overflow may happens in any functions. For
> example:
>
> int x()
> {
> int a[100];
> malloc(1);
> return x();
> }
>
> int main()
> {
> return x();
> }
>
>> Sanitizer says the same. There isn't really anything that can be done
>> when stack is exceeded! There isn't a StackOverflowException
>
> This is gcc-help, not java-help or python-help. But actually you can do
> something here:
>
> 0. Do not consume so much stack. Throw large things into the heap.
> 1. Set a signal handler for SIGSEGV. And you will need sigaltstack so the
> signal handler can run in an alternative stack.
> 2. Use ulimit -s or setrlimit to increase stack limit, if you really need more
> stack.
> 3. Use -fsplit-stack to automatically "increase" stack size when it overflows,
> if you really need this feature.
>
> If you don't like all of these suggestions, go to use Java.
>
Sorry, it looks like there was a misunderstanding. I don't need more
stack. Testcase was created to recurse and reproduce crash! It
replicated a typo in an application change, which called itself !
The compiler toolchain is ideally placed to provide a clearer abort,
exit, backtrace when such issues occur. Feels like this mailing list is
the ideal place to discuss.
Jonny
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-25 20:39 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
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 [this message]
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=e10dfb8d-9bdc-3482-9924-e707982a81ca@jguk.org \
--to=jg@jguk.org \
--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).