Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>
To: Michael Snyder <msnyder@redhat.com>
Cc: Hilfinger@cs.berkeley.edu, Don Howard <dhoward@redhat.com>,
	gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFA] Avoid recursivly defined user functions.
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 03:17:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <jeadsjemsm.fsf@sykes.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3CAB9346.724C11BB@redhat.com> (Michael Snyder's message of "Wed, 03 Apr 2002 15:41:58 -0800")

Michael Snyder <msnyder@redhat.com> writes:

|> Paul Hilfinger wrote:
|> > 
|> > > Executing a recursively defined user function results in a core-dump from
|> > > gdb:
|> > 
|> > ...
|> > 
|> > > The following patch catches recursive user function definitions and
|> > > disallowes them:
|> > 
|> > Is the segmentation fault the result of stack overflow? 
|> 
|> Yes it is.
|> 
|> > If so, I
|> > point out that there is an 'if' statement, so recursive commands are
|> > not necessarily wrong, are they?
|> 
|> No they're not.  So it's a judgement call.  Is it more important
|> to allow recursive macros, or to prevent GDB from dumping core?
|> We're basically running an interpreter here...
|> 
|> I guess one thing we could do would be to impose an arbitrary
|> (possibly user-settable) stack depth limit.  That's more work, 
|> of course...

The simple minded check in Don's patch won't catch many cases of infinite
recursion anyway (mutual recursion, command invocation with arguments).

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
SuSE GmbH, Deutschherrnstr. 15-19, D-90429 Nürnberg
Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."


  reply	other threads:[~2002-04-04 11:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-04-03 14:09 Don Howard
2002-04-03 14:36 ` Paul Hilfinger
2002-04-03 15:53   ` Michael Snyder
2002-04-04  3:17     ` Andreas Schwab [this message]
2002-04-09 14:01       ` Don Howard
2002-04-09 14:05         ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-04-09 14:09           ` Paul Hilfinger
2002-04-09 14:18             ` Don Howard
2002-04-11 10:56               ` Don Howard
2002-04-11 12:08                 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-04-11 12:41                 ` Eli Zaretskii
2002-04-11 13:55                 ` Michael Snyder
2002-04-12  4:08                 ` Andreas Schwab
2002-04-12 11:28                   ` Michael Snyder
2002-04-12 12:07                     ` Fernando Nasser
2002-04-12 15:32                       ` Don Howard
2002-04-13  1:44                         ` Eli Zaretskii
2002-04-13  9:33                           ` Don Howard
2002-04-09 14:20         ` Andreas Schwab
2002-04-11 19:23 Eli Zaretskii
2002-04-13 10:04 Eli Zaretskii

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=jeadsjemsm.fsf@sykes.suse.de \
    --to=schwab@suse.de \
    --cc=Hilfinger@cs.berkeley.edu \
    --cc=dhoward@redhat.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
    --cc=msnyder@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