From: Dawson Engler <engler@csl.Stanford.EDU>
To: bcrl@redhat.com (Benjamin LaHaise)
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Re: [CHECKER] 37 stack variables >= 1K in 2.4.17
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 23:36:58 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200206130636.XAA08465@csl.Stanford.EDU> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020612175127.A4081@redhat.com> from "Benjamin LaHaise" at Jun 12, 2002 05:51:27 PM
>
> On Sun, Jun 09, 2002 at 08:56:30PM -0700, Dawson Engler wrote:
> > Here are 37 errors where variables >= 1024 bytes are allocated on a function's
> > stack.
>
> Is it possible to get checker to determine the stack depth of a worst
> case call chain (excluding interrupts)? I've found that deep call chains
> are far more likely to cause stack overflows than short and bounded paths.
Yeah, it's not that hard. The main problem is determining if recursive
loops are feasible. I'd released bugs from it before, but no one fixed any
so hadn't rerun it since.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-06-13 6:37 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
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 [this message]
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=200206130636.XAA08465@csl.Stanford.EDU \
--to=engler@csl.stanford.edu \
--cc=bcrl@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mc@cs.Stanford.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®