https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87636
--- Comment #1 from Cheng Wen <wcventure at 126 dot com> --- I have summarized the different recursive stack frames problem in c++filt. > This issue (In cp-demangle.c.c) > recursive stack frames: cplus_demangle_type, d_bare_function_type, > d_function_type I find that many people have reported similar problem, but it has not been completely fixed. For example: https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2018-9138 https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2018-9996 https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2018-12641 > [CVE-2018-9138] (In cplus-dem.c) > recursive stack frames: demangle_nested_args, demangle_args, do_arg, and > do_type > [CVE-2018-9996] (In cplus-dem.c) > recursive stack frames: demangle_template_value_parm, > demangle_integral_value, and demangle_expression > [CVE-2018-12641] (In cplus-dem.c) > recursive stack frames: demangle_arm_hp_template, demangle_class_name, > demangle_fund_type, do_type, do_arg, demangle_args, and demangle_nested_args. In addition, there are still some practical problems that have not been successfully reproduced. For example: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85452 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87340 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87333 I tried to reproduce above problem on different machines. That may be your compilation options mismatch. You can try to use the compiler options that I provided. > CC=clang LDFLAGS="-ldl" CFLAGS="-DFORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fstack-protector-all > -fsanitize=undefined,address -fno-omit-frame-pointer -g -O0 -Wno-error" > ./configure --disable-shared --disable-gdb --disable-libdecnumber > --disable-sim --prefix=$PWD/build/ > CC=clang CXX=clang++ CFLAGS="-fsanitize=address -fsanitize-recover=address > -ggdb" CXXFLAGS="-fsanitize=address -fsanitize-recover=address -ggdb" > LDFLAGS="-fsanitize=address" ./configure --prefix=$PWD/build/ Many of these problems have not been completely fixed. I think this problem may need attention.
