On 01/04/2016 07:33 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> From: Daniel Colascione <dancol@dancol.org>
>> Date: Sun, 3 Jan 2016 14:55:26 -0800
>>
>> The code that bothers me is the code that longjmps *out* of the sigsegv
>> handler that catches stack overflow. The handler being there is fine.
>> Under my proposed scheme, we won't longjmp out of the handler unless the
>> user tells us to do that.
> 
> You won't be able to do anything except call printf, without jumping
> out of the handler.  The stack space left after stack overflow is too
> small for anything fancier.  You will almost certainly crash, that's
> all.

There's no guarantee that you can even call printf. And you continue to
ignore the existence of the alternate signal stack.

>