From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
To: Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>
Cc: ian@airs.com, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, binutils@sourceware.org,
matz@gcc.gnu.org, sgayou@redhat.com, jason@redhat.com
Subject: Re: RFA/RFC: Add stack recursion limit to libiberty's demangler
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 08:42:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181130084211.GX12380@tucnak> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87muprdko7.fsf@redhat.com>
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 08:38:48AM +0000, Nick Clifton wrote:
> Also - Tom and Pedro have raised the issue that the patch introduces
> a new static variable to the library that is not thread safe. I am
> not sure of the best way to address this problem. Possibly the
> variable could be made thread local ? Are there any other static
Please don't. That has a cost for all the programs that link against
libstdc++ or any other library that includes the demangler, even when they
don't use the demangler at all (99.9% of the users).
Most of the demangler functions pass around a pointer to a struct with
context, can't this be added in there?
Jakub
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-11-30 8:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-11-30 8:38 Nick Clifton
2018-11-30 8:42 ` Jakub Jelinek [this message]
2018-11-30 10:27 ` Nick Clifton
2018-11-30 13:46 ` Michael Matz
2018-11-30 14:57 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2018-12-02 0:49 ` Cary Coutant
2018-12-03 14:53 ` Nick Clifton
2018-12-03 22:00 ` Joseph Myers
2018-11-30 13:56 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2018-11-30 14:03 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-11-30 17:41 ` RFA/RFC: Add stack recursion limit to libiberty's demangler [v3] Nick Clifton
2018-11-30 17:49 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-11-30 18:19 ` Pedro Alves
2018-12-03 10:28 ` Richard Biener
2018-12-03 14:45 ` Nick Clifton
2018-12-03 18:49 ` Ian Lance Taylor via gcc-patches
2018-12-04 14:00 ` RFA/RFC: Add stack recursion limit to libiberty's demangler [v4] Nick Clifton
2018-12-04 15:02 ` Pedro Alves
2018-12-04 16:57 ` RFA/RFC: Add stack recursion limit to libiberty's demangler [v5] Nick Clifton
2018-12-04 17:08 ` Pedro Alves
2018-12-06 11:12 ` Nick Clifton
2018-12-06 18:04 ` Ian Lance Taylor via gcc-patches
2018-12-07 16:17 ` H.J. Lu
2018-12-07 16:25 ` [PATCH] Set DEMANGLE_RECURSION_LIMIT to 1536 H.J. Lu
2018-12-10 14:52 ` Michael Matz
2018-12-10 15:10 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-12-10 15:34 ` Jason Merrill
2018-12-11 0:33 ` Jeff Law
2018-12-11 6:58 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-12-11 11:05 ` Pedro Alves
2018-12-11 14:26 ` Ian Lance Taylor via gcc-patches
2018-12-11 15:07 ` Pedro Alves
2018-12-11 10:34 ` Pedro Alves
2018-12-10 15:12 ` Nick Clifton
2018-12-10 15:18 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-12-10 15:26 ` Nick Clifton
2018-12-10 15:35 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-12-10 18:20 ` Ian Lance Taylor via gcc-patches
2018-12-10 18:55 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-12-10 23:47 ` Jason Merrill
2018-12-10 15:18 ` David Malcolm
2018-12-10 15:31 ` Nick Clifton
2018-12-06 16:14 ` RFA/RFC: Add stack recursion limit to libiberty's demangler [v5] Jason Merrill
2018-12-06 21:22 ` RFC: libiberty PATCH to disable demangling of ancient mangling schemes Jason Merrill
2018-12-07 10:27 ` Nick Clifton
2018-12-07 10:40 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-12-07 16:11 ` Pedro Alves
2018-12-07 17:49 ` Tom Tromey
2018-12-07 21:00 ` Jason Merrill
2018-12-14 22:39 ` Jason Merrill
2018-12-16 4:50 ` Simon Marchi
2018-12-07 16:28 ` Nick Clifton
2018-12-07 11:37 ` Richard Biener
2018-12-07 15:49 ` Jason Merrill
2018-12-10 1:04 ` Eric Gallager
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2018-11-29 15:01 RFA/RFC: Add stack recursion limit to libiberty's demangler Nick Clifton
2018-11-29 17:08 ` Scott Gayou
2018-11-30 8:42 ` Nick Clifton
2018-11-29 18:20 ` Pedro Alves
2018-11-29 22:18 ` Ian Lance Taylor
[not found] ` <87h8fza6fh.fsf@tromey.com>
[not found] ` <43e6c9e6-8249-bf56-aed8-90d0f771c567@redhat.com>
2018-11-30 11:58 ` Pedro Alves
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=20181130084211.GX12380@tucnak \
--to=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=ian@airs.com \
--cc=jason@redhat.com \
--cc=matz@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=nickc@redhat.com \
--cc=sgayou@redhat.com \
/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).