This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH 0/3 v4] Demangler crash handler
- From: Doug Evans <xdje42 at gmail dot com>
- To: Gary Benson <gbenson at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "gdb-patches at sourceware dot org" <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>, Andrew Burgess <aburgess at broadcom dot com>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>, Florian Weimer <fw at deneb dot enyo dot de>, Mark Kettenis <mark dot kettenis at xs4all dot nl>, Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>, Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 09:19:21 -0700
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3 v4] Demangler crash handler
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20140605130140 dot GA20572 at blade dot nx>
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 6:01 AM, Gary Benson <gbenson@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This patch is an updated version of the demangler crash handler I
> posted yesterday. The main changes from the previous version are:
>
> 1) All #ifdef SIGSEGV conditionals have been removed.
>
> 2) If the user set "ulimit -c 0" then no core file will be
> created and a warning will be printed. This mirrors what
> internal_error and internal_warning currently do.
>
> 3) A separate signal stack is created for the SIGSEGV handler
> to allow it to function correctly if the normal process
> stack overflows. This signal stack is currently only used
> by the SIGSEGV handler--all other signal handlers use the
> normal process stack as before.
>
> Doug requested that I change the patch to emit warnings for every
> demangler crash, not just the first.
Umm, that's not what I said, to be precise, and it was more of a
suggestion for discussion than a request.
> I've not done this, my reason
> being that subsequent failures could have been caused by the first,
> by memory corruption or some leftover state: they could be bogus,
> and could lead to us chasing bugs that don't exist. I prefer this
> way, but I'm not hung up on it and if it's a blocker for Doug or
> anyone else I will add the extra warnings.
It's not a blocker to me.