On Wed, 2017-03-08 at 09:05 -0500, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> thanks. in case you'd not noticed Ian T's okayed my review. so this is
> good to go
Thanks. Markus pushed it including the testcases.
But there are still two testcase (not added, but attached below) that
are still failing (but now
On 03/08/2017 08:29 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
On Wed, 2017-03-08 at 08:22 -0500, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-03/msg00089.html?
Patch looks good to me (not a libiberty maintainer)
One question:
+ if (dc == NULL || dc->d_printing > 1)
Can dc ever be null here,
On Wed, 2017-03-08 at 08:22 -0500, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-03/msg00089.html?
>
> Patch looks good to me (not a libiberty maintainer)
>
> One question:
> + if (dc == NULL || dc->d_printing > 1)
>
> Can dc ever be null here, or is this just extra
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-03/msg00089.html?
Patch looks good to me (not a libiberty maintainer)
One question:
+ if (dc == NULL || dc->d_printing > 1)
Can dc ever be null here, or is this just extra defensiveness?
nathan
--
Nathan Sidwell
Hi,
On Thu, 2017-03-02 at 10:36 +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> The following patch from Mark Wielaard fixes many (all?) open demangler
> bugs that happen because we overflow the stack due to infinite
> recursion.
>
> I'm not sure why Mark didn't post the patch himself.
> Anyway here it is.
The following patch from Mark Wielaard fixes many (all?) open demangler
bugs that happen because we overflow the stack due to infinite
recursion.
I'm not sure why Mark didn't post the patch himself.
Anyway here it is.
Any comments?
Thanks.
diff --git a/include/demangle.h b/include/demangle.h
