From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12142 invoked by alias); 1 Jan 2002 06:05:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 12115 invoked from network); 1 Jan 2002 06:05:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO is.elta.co.il) (199.203.121.2) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 1 Jan 2002 06:05:35 -0000 Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2]) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA21013; Tue, 1 Jan 2002 08:04:49 +0200 (IST) Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 22:05:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii X-Sender: eliz@is To: Michael Snyder cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] Crasher bug in infptrace.c In-Reply-To: <3C30C416.2939@redhat.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2001-12/txt/msg00621.txt.bz2 On Mon, 31 Dec 2001, Michael Snyder wrote: > > > (FWIW, 1MB is too large for DJGPP, whose runtime stack defaults to > > > 512KB. `getrlimit' is supported, so it will tell.) > > > > Does djgpp use infptrace? > > And I meant to add -- if so, you can always define GDB_MAX_ALLOCA > to a smaller value. Having yet another system-dependent macro is something I wanted to avoid. Also, a static compile-time limit would have trouble in the face of users and sysadmins who can change the stack limits with `ulimit' and similar facilities. Even with DJGPP, you can modify the maximum stack size of a program to an arbitrarily large or small value with a special utility. Perhaps setting the limit you suggested to a much smaller value, like 10KB, say, would be a better and easier way of solving this. IIRC, last time the alloca issue was discussed, the consensus about the maximum size of safe off-stack allocations was that it should be a few KB.