[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Dynamic modules: MODULE_HANDLE_SIGNALS etc.

From: Daniel Colascione
Subject: Re: Dynamic modules: MODULE_HANDLE_SIGNALS etc.
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 07:28:07 -0800
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0

On 01/04/2016 07:24 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> From: Daniel Colascione <address@hidden>
>> Date: Sun, 3 Jan 2016 13:12:29 -0800
>>> I think something along that lines would suffice, yes. Admittedly I
>>> didn't quite follow what you wrote (perhaps some text got elided?). But
>>> the main point, as I understand it, is that we needn't worry about
>>> having a stack-overflow check inside the stack-overflow handler, because
>>> we can insist that the stack-overflow handler be tightly-enough
>>> controlled so that it won't recurse indefinitely.
>> Yes: do as little as possible in the segfault handler and signal an
>> error the normal way at the next safe opportunity, if one arises before
>> we fully exhaust the stack.
> You cannot do that when the stack is exhausted.  You will almost
> certainly crash if you try.

That's why we have the alternate signal stack.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]