public inbox for gcc-prs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Edward Welbourne <eddy@opera.no>
To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
Subject: Re: c/8743: receiving result from __builtin_return_address() beyond stack top causes segfault
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 02:06:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20021205100602.32466.qmail@sources.redhat.com> (raw)

The following reply was made to PR c/8743; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Edward Welbourne <eddy@opera.no>
To: bangerth@dealii.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: biere@inf.ethz.ch, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
	nobody@gcc.gnu.org, steven.robbins@videotron.ca
Subject: Re: c/8743: receiving result from __builtin_return_address() beyond stack top causes segfault
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 11:04:34 +0100

 Also: note that the work-around only fixes the problem for the *first*
 LEVEL at which it would otherwise seg-fault (which *is* just enough to
 enable backtracing in ccmalloc); it does nothing about the segfault at
 greater depth, which also happens in __builtin_frame_address(); if you
 use __builtin_frame_address(3) in place of __builtin_return_address(2)
 in the example code, you'll get a segfault just the same (on x86).
 
 [All of which rather hints that these functions do a zig-zag chain of
 pointer dereferences, which is missing an `are we zero yet' test.
 I naively imagine this will be easy to fix.]
 
 I've now had the opportunity to test the same on a ppc:
 __builtin_return_address(2) segfaults, as does
 __builtin_frame_address(4), but
 __builtin_frame_address(3) actually succeeds !
 This is with a 2.95.? version and with 3.2.1.
 
 	Eddy.


             reply	other threads:[~2002-12-05 10:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-12-05  2:06 Edward Welbourne [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-12-04 14:00 bangerth

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=20021205100602.32466.qmail@sources.redhat.com \
    --to=eddy@opera.no \
    --cc=gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=nobody@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).