On Oct 21, 2013, at 9:11 AM, Corey Richardson <co...@octayn.net> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Patrick Walton <pwal...@mozilla.com> wrote: >> This seems generally on the right track. A couple of thoughts: >> >> * I can pretty much guarantee you that that simple of a static analysis to >> determine stack size is going to fail on any reasonable program. I would >> just leave it out. If you're feeling ambitious, you could implement it as an >> LLVM pass to eliminate stack bounds checks on recursion-free leaves of the >> call graph. (LLVM is the right place to do it, as it can make these >> decisions post-inlining, and also knows the exact amount of stack space each >> function takes up.) >> > > Yep. It's mostly for the case where recursion and dynamic dispatch is > going to be denied, which seems to be the case for some > embedded/realtime contexts, afaict from the available research. It seems to me that trying to determine max stack size is incompatible with dynamic linking. So even if you disallow recursion, any function that calls a function outside of its own crate is not going to be able to trust its calculated max stack size. -Kevin
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
