Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the URL shown below and enter your comments there.
Changed by [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bugzilla.ximian.com/show_bug.cgi?id=81685 --- shadow/81685 2007-07-30 12:36:35.000000000 -0400 +++ shadow/81685.tmp.29588 2007-07-31 12:20:30.000000000 -0400 @@ -220,6 +220,27 @@ uninformative short sigsegv message). Additional work needed: *) port more architectures to the new code *) setup the additional protected pages on the stacks so we can make stack overflows catchable, at least in some cases + +------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-31 12:20 ------- +svn has a few improvements: we are able to catch stack overflows that +happen in managed code in most cases. The missing cases are basically two: +1) an additional stack overflow that happens in a finally/fault/filter +clause while already handling a stack overflow (ie robert's sample +above works, but it would fail if the first fault is caused by a stack +overflow itself) +2) a managed stack overflow that happens after a soft unmanaged stack +overflow (where we unprotect the soft guard pages and let execution +continue, at least until the thread recovers or does a hard stack +overflow) +In both cases we print useful error messages so the user should be +able to debug his problem. +2) can be addressed in two ways: preventing soft unamanged stack +overflows from happening by doing some stack peeking in the +managed->unmanaged wrappers or restoring the soft guard protection +when returning from those same wrappers (this would be done only when +needed using the already existing mechanism fro thread.abort) +1) is harder to solve but corrently only needed when wanting to run +untrusted code in a safe way _______________________________________________ mono-bugs maillist - [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-bugs
