From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <55314CA0.7070705@siemens.com> Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 20:10:40 +0200 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <55314426.7040300@siemens.com> <20150417175028.GP1589@hermes.click-hack.org> <55314B85.2030708@siemens.com> <20150417180819.GQ1589@hermes.click-hack.org> In-Reply-To: <20150417180819.GQ1589@hermes.click-hack.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Xenomai] Dealing with too small thread stacks List-Id: Discussions about the Xenomai project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Gilles Chanteperdrix Cc: Xenomai On 2015-04-17 20:08, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 08:05:57PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> On 2015-04-17 19:50, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: >>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 07:34:30PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> analyzing page faults of an application that prefers to set its own >>>> stacks, I noticed a problem in Xenomai (2 and 3), at least from the >>>> usability POV: We document the minimum stack stack as PTHREAD_STACK_MIN >>>> + 1 page, at least in Xenomai 3, and we enforce that on thread creation. >>>> However, enforcement is doomed to fail if the stack is preallocated (and >>>> that too small). >>>> >>>> As we cannot detect if the user set a stack address in pthread_attr_t, I >>>> would suggest to fail thread creation instead of performing it with >>>> improper parameters. Other suggestions? If not, I would prepare a patch >>>> for Xenomai 3 (for 2 only if desired). >>> >>> It seems to me we can detect the parameters in the pthread_attr_t >>> using pthread_attr_getstack. So, we can get __wrap_pthread_create to >>> fail if the size is not sufficient. >> >> Nope, unfortunately not: >> >> "If the pthread_attr_getstack() function is called before the stackaddr >> attribute has been set, the behavior is unspecified." > > It is unspecified by POSIX, but Xenomai supports only two > implementations, glibc and uClibc, so, we can look at what these two > libraries do. I would bet they return you a NULL stack pointer or > something. I would have expected that, too, but the results for glibc seem random. Plus there is the risk that something changes, thus we become version-dependent. Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SES-DE Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux