From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#24358: 25.1.50; re-search-forward errors with "Variable binding depth exceeds max-specpdl-size" Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2016 23:18:03 +0300 Message-ID: <83h982n7k4.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87eg3rvtsf.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <83k2dihpm9.fsf@gnu.org> <8760p2wzgj.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <838ttyhhzu.fsf@gnu.org> <871szqwu51.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <831szqhbc2.fsf@gnu.org> <87h98hujcx.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <831szkahyz.fsf@gnu.org> <87eg3jvfj6.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <8360ov8lbu.fsf@gnu.org> <877f95uj66.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <83zim0vn1t.fsf@gnu.org> <874m48v7wj.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <83insov1zr.fsf@gnu.org> <87zilztzd5.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <83oa2ftnvp.fsf@gnu.org> <87wph2ts1a.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <83oa2erx0k.fsf@gnu.org> <87lgxht8hp.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <871sz8kq2v.fsf@gmail.com> <87shroroh8.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <838ttfpnxt.fsf@gnu.org> <83vawjo21l.fsf@gnu.org> <83bmybnopx.fsf@gnu.org> <8360ojnk0n.fsf@gnu.org> <83twc3m198.fsf@gnu.org> <83pomrlz27.fsf@gnu.org> <83lgxenao0.fsf@gnu.org> <83insin9n8.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1477253964 19067 195.159.176.226 (23 Oct 2016 20:19:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2016 20:19:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: sam.halliday@gmail.com, 24358@debbugs.gnu.org To: npostavs@users.sourceforge.net Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 23 22:19:20 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1byPEc-0003Iq-SX for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 22:19:10 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42281 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byPEf-0000Ud-96 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 16:19:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47635) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byPEY-0000UI-H8 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 16:19:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byPEU-0000Uu-Hu for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 16:19:06 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:34763) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byPEU-0000UT-Fu for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 16:19:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1byPEU-00011a-Av for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 16:19:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2016 20:19:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 24358 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch fixed Original-Received: via spool by 24358-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B24358.14772538983872 (code B ref 24358); Sun, 23 Oct 2016 20:19:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 24358) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Oct 2016 20:18:18 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50160 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1byPDl-00010N-Ux for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 16:18:18 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:56521) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1byPDk-000109-Au for 24358@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 16:18:16 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byPDb-0000Du-1b for 24358@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 16:18:11 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:38498) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byPDa-0000Do-Uq; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 16:18:06 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:3349 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1byPDa-0004LR-6A; Sun, 23 Oct 2016 16:18:06 -0400 In-reply-to: <83insin9n8.fsf@gnu.org> (message from Eli Zaretskii on Sun, 23 Oct 2016 22:32:59 +0300) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:124933 Archived-At: Noam, there's something I don't understand here: why is regex.c using malloc for allocating the failure stack? AFAICS, REGEX_MALLOC is not defined, so the only way I can explain this to myself is that we use SAFE_ALLOCA, and that falls back to malloc because the failure stack needs more than 16KB of memory. Is that correct? If so, then one other way of solving the original problem that doesn't open the gates of the ralloc.c hell is to allow a larger amount of stack allocations in regex.c before we fall back to malloc. Since the maximum size of the failure stack is limited by something like 800KB, and the C stack limit is set in main.c to allow the failure stack be allocated off the stack, why don't we make use of this fact?