From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Two issues with stack overflow protection Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 20:23:00 +0300 Message-ID: <838ua0xkln.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1438104377 4806 80.91.229.3 (28 Jul 2015 17:26:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 17:26:17 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 28 19:26:07 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZK8dj-0004fb-Fg for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 19:26:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60133 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZK8di-00015X-GU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 13:26:06 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44935) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZK8aw-0003xh-Ex for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 13:23:15 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZK8at-0001sU-4b for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 13:23:14 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout24.012.net.il ([80.179.55.180]:35939) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZK8as-0001sO-U7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 13:23:11 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout24.012.net.il by mtaout24.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NS700200JVL0000@mtaout24.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 20:14:41 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by mtaout24.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NS700FYUJWHQZA0@mtaout24.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 20:14:41 +0300 (IDT) X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 80.179.55.180 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:188139 Archived-At: The implementation of stack_overflow on sysdep.c was recently changed so as not to use sys/resource.h and getrlimit, but configure.ac still insists on these two features in order to include the recovery code, which I think should be fixed. More importantly, the recovery simply longjmps to command_loop, whereas similar features like Fthrow and Fsignal do much more in unwind_to_catch. Shouldn't stack overflow recovery do that as well? Otherwise, the specpdl stack, byte_stack_list, lisp_eval_depth etc. all stay at their values they had at stack overflow time, no?