This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Use malloca instead alloca

From: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
To: libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 17:09:23 +0100
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use malloca instead alloca
References: <20121228132908.GA23510@domone> <50DDD217.4050707@cs.ucla.edu> <20121228173823.GA15219@domone> <20121228201729.GD20323@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20121229103315.GA9680@domone> <50DF2A7C.3080906@cs.ucla.edu> <20130108010534.471EC2C0DF@topped-with-meat.com> <20130108204117.GA15218@domone.kolej.mff.cuni.cz>

On 01/08/2013 09:41 PM, OndÅej BÃlka wrote:

One technical issue is if we want to use STACKINFO_BP_DEF. It would make
getting base pointer more portable but must be added to each function
that uses __libc_use_alloca.

I'm interested in extending GCC to provide a better alloca, including one that can fail. Parts of the split stacks support might reusable for obtaining the stack boundary.

I'm a bit skeptical about the whole alloca-if-we-have-room concept. We must make sure that we keep sufficient stack space for further operation. But I'm not sure how to determine the magic number of bytes to reserve.

--
Florian Weimer / Red Hat Product Security Team

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] Use malloca instead alloca
  - From: Rich Felker

References:
- Re: [PATCH] Use malloca instead alloca
  - From: Roland McGrath
- Re: [PATCH] Use malloca instead alloca
  - From: OndÅej BÃlka

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]