|
Message-ID: <20130331210005.GJ20323@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2013 17:00:05 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: pthread_getattr_np On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 10:51:39PM +0200, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > > In practice, it seems like GC applications only care about the start > > (upper limit) of the stack, not the other end; they use the current > > stack pointer for the other limit. We could probe the current stack > > pointer of the target thread by freezing it (with the synccall magic), > > but this seems like it might be excessively costly for no practical > > benefit... > > eg. address sanitizer creates a shadow map for the stack so > at least it needs a reasonably sized upper bound on the > stack size (but it does the /proc parsing magic itselfs for > the main thread at startup so we don't have to support that) > > if the lowend is not used otherwise then we can give arbitrary > result (eg always returning highend-5MB or using the rlimit > truncated to some value when it's unlimited) > > all the calls to this function seem to use pthread_self() > at thread creation or startup time, so synccall is probably > not needed to get a sp I just meant if we want the API to work in general... > to get a 'precize' lowend one can: > 1) parse /proc/self/maps which gives the current [low,high] mapping > and 'prev' the high end of the last mapping below the stack > 2) if we are the main thread check if low <= sp <= high > 3) check rlimit Parsing /proc/self/maps is utterly useless for non-main-thread. Unless the thread has a guard page, its stack mapping can be adjacent to another thread's stack mapping, and thus they can get merged into a single mapping. Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.