From: Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>
To: Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@redhat.com>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@math.psu.edu>,
Dawson Engler <engler@csl.Stanford.EDU>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Re: [CHECKER] 37 stack variables >= 1K in 2.4.17
Date: 12 Jun 2002 15:44:16 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1023921856.1476.64.camel@sinai> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020612183854.B4081@redhat.com>
On Wed, 2002-06-12 at 15:38, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
> Perfection isn't what I'm looking for, rather just an approximation.
> Any tool would have to give up on non-trivial recursion, or have
> additional rules imposed on the system. Checker seems to be growing
> functionality in this area, so it seems like a useful feature request.
I do not want to give up on this idea, either... if the implementation
needs to be "hackish" or even explicitly ignore certain functions, so be
it. There is a _lot_ that can be done with detailed call chain analysis
-- the point you gave is one of many.
Checker already has some basic functionality here I suspect based on
what it is capable of reporting... imagine what more could be reported?
Robert Love
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-06-12 22:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-06-10 3:56 Dawson Engler
2002-06-12 8:43 ` Pavel Machek
2002-06-12 19:11 ` Nikita Danilov
2002-06-12 21:51 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2002-06-12 22:26 ` Alexander Viro
2002-06-12 22:38 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2002-06-12 22:44 ` Robert Love [this message]
2002-06-12 22:55 ` procfs documentation Tom Bradley
2002-06-13 11:17 ` John Levon
2002-06-13 0:20 ` [CHECKER] 37 stack variables >= 1K in 2.4.17 Alexander Viro
2002-06-13 8:30 ` Helge Hafting
2002-06-13 13:24 ` Roger Larsson
2002-06-14 10:06 ` Helge Hafting
2002-06-13 6:38 ` Dawson Engler
2002-06-13 6:59 ` Alexander Viro
2002-06-13 17:41 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-06-13 17:53 ` Alexander Viro
2002-06-13 18:45 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-06-13 17:56 ` Andi Kleen
2002-06-13 18:26 ` Alexander Viro
2002-06-13 19:01 ` Andi Kleen
2002-06-14 0:05 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-06-13 21:50 ` Dawson Engler
2002-06-13 22:43 ` Oliver Xymoron
2002-06-14 0:25 ` Alexander Viro
2002-06-13 6:36 ` Dawson Engler
2002-06-16 0:48 Andries.Brouwer
2002-06-16 1:08 ` Alexander Viro
2002-06-16 7:47 Andries.Brouwer
2002-06-16 8:36 ` Alexander Viro
2002-06-16 9:59 Andries.Brouwer
2002-06-16 10:33 ` Alexander Viro
2002-06-16 10:56 Andries.Brouwer
2002-06-16 11:38 ` Alexander Viro
2002-06-16 13:13 Andries.Brouwer
2002-06-16 18:51 ` Alexander Viro
2002-06-16 20:41 Andries.Brouwer
2002-06-16 21:33 ` Andreas Dilger
2002-06-16 21:34 ` Alexander Viro
2002-06-17 10:09 ` David Woodhouse
2002-06-16 22:05 Andries.Brouwer
2002-06-16 23:57 ` Alexander Viro
2002-06-17 11:07 Andries.Brouwer
2002-06-17 12:00 ` David Woodhouse
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1023921856.1476.64.camel@sinai \
--to=rml@tech9.net \
--cc=bcrl@redhat.com \
--cc=engler@csl.Stanford.EDU \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mc@cs.Stanford.EDU \
--cc=viro@math.psu.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®