https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239894
--- Comment #3 from Greg Lewis <gle...@freebsd.org> --- Thanks for the response Konstantin! I can see a couple of problems with that approach. The biggest problem is that not all SIGSEGV should be interpreted as a stack overflow. With the possibility of whatever homegrown JNI code the user may have running and the internal native code in JDK itself, a SIGSEGV does not necessarily mean that a stack overflow is occurring, and interpreting it that way will lead to other incorrect behaviour. The second problem is that it seems like that still leaves the JVM unable to allow access to the reserved pages at the top of the guard zone for critical sections to complete. See the reference I posted earlier to JEP 270 for why that is important (there is another internal test that checks for that). Kurt may have other concerns, but those would be mine. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. _______________________________________________ freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-bugs To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-bugs-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
