stack overflow bug in ofstream::operator<<
Tue Jun 28 17:25:00 GMT 2005
On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 01:12:41PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>On Tue, 28 Jun 2005, Dave Korn wrote:
>> ----Original Message----
>> >From: Corinna Vinschen
>> >Sent: 28 June 2005 16:57
>> > I had something like that as a local patch but that's a bit dangerous.
>> Well, yeh. But somewhat less dangerous than the existing situation!
>> > Imagine a process using lots of stack space before calling writev and
>> > there's only, say, 32K left.
>> Imagine a process using no stack space at all before calling writev and
>> there's only, say, 2Mb left. Oh, hang on, that's where we came in!
>> > It would potentially get a SEGV since
>> > alloca is used while it would still work when using malloc. Of course
>> > malloc could fail for a process using lots of malloc'ed space. However,
>> > malloc should at least not SEGV but just return with a NULL pointer...
>> Indeed, and perhaps the best fix of all would be if alloca was able to
>> return NULL when there wasn't enough space on the stack.
>> > So, I guess I'll just check it in using malloc.
>> Hmm. Can't we tell how much space there is on the stack from the pointers
>> to the stack limits in the NT_TIB (or whatever lives at %fs on 9x), where we
>> get the tls pointers from?
>I wonder -- would temporarily installing a signal handler be too much
>overhead? Or is it a thread safety issue (global vars, etc)?
signal handlers only work on the main thread.
I am working on a replacement for the use of IsBad*Ptr, though, which is
thread safe and could be pressed into service here.
More information about the Cygwin-developers