Hi all,
A while ago, while working on btfs, I stumbled upon some sort of
overflow (http://9fans.net/archive/2009/07/77) which was in fact due
to the thread STACK being too small (and hence if I understood
correctly things would get written out of it, in the heap).
To be on the safe side, I have
A while ago, while working on btfs, I stumbled upon some sort of
overflow (http://9fans.net/archive/2009/07/77) which was in fact due
to the thread STACK being too small (and hence if I understood
correctly things would get written out of it, in the heap).
To be on the safe side, I have it
I've found it useful to use the testing of the program to also
force it to get into what I think is a worst case and then printing the
stack size (doing this is simple by printing argument addresses).
hth
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Federico G. Benavento
benave...@gmail.com wrote:
also if
As a general rule in threaded programs, avoid declaring local arrays
or large structs. Instead, malloc them and free them when you're done.
A file server, as an example, should never allocate an 8K message
buffer on the stack. If you can manage to obey the rule of not having
arrays on the
