filcab added inline comments.
================
Comment at:
source/Plugins/InstrumentationRuntime/AddressSanitizer/AddressSanitizerRuntime.cpp:220
+ } else if (description == "stack-overflow") {
+ return "Stack overflow detected (recursion too deep)";
+ } else if (description == "null-deref") {
----------------
kubabrecka wrote:
> filcab wrote:
> > Not necessarily recursion. There's also stack variables. I'd omit the stuff
> > in parenthesis.
> Multiple times have I seen that people read "stack overflow" as "stack
> **buffer** overflow" and they spend a lot of time trying to find what buffer
> was actually overflown... I'd like to somehow point that out. Ideas?
Maybe instead of "recursion too deep" have "stack space exhausted" or something
like that?
I've seen stack overflow errors on as few as 10 (maybe even fewer) stack frames
(with big objects). ASan is also more likely to make this a problem. I think
seeing "recursion too deep" but having only a dozen frames is probably
confusing.
Not that "stack space exhausted" is much better, but I think it's less likely
to be misleading.
And yes, please ask native speakers too, as I'm not one either. :-)
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D27017
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
