From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38643)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1WFhax-0002Ns-PB
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 05:08:16 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1WFhap-0007iN-7Z
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 05:08:07 -0500
Received: from mail-ea0-x233.google.com ([2a00:1450:4013:c01::233]:53240)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1WFhao-0007iG-LA
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 05:07:59 -0500
Received: by mail-ea0-f179.google.com with SMTP id q10so7110839ead.24
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 02:07:57 -0800 (PST)
Sender: Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <530330F9.5070608@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 11:07:53 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1392651898-16749-1-git-send-email-stefanha@redhat.com>	<1392651898-16749-4-git-send-email-stefanha@redhat.com>	<530235F0.2040406@redhat.com>	<87a9dpsmi4.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
	<20140218090504.GB32585@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20140218090504.GB32585@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/3] qtest: kill QEMU process on g_assert()
	failure
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Anthony Liguori <aliguori@amazon.com>, Andreas Faerber <afaerber@suse.de>

Il 18/02/2014 10:05, Stefan Hajnoczi ha scritto:
>> > SIGABRT is normally synchronous enough: it's sent by abort().  But of
>> > course, nothing stops the user from kill -ABRT.  Or GLib from calling
>> > abort() in some place where an attempt to reenter it crashes & burns.
>> > Not sure I'd care, but I'm pretty sure I don't care for freeing stuff on
>> > exit :)
> Yes, SIGABRT is synchronous for all purposes.  So the only danger is
> that g_string_free() or g_free() could fail while we're in
> g_assert(false).  But they don't, which makes sense because they are
> totally unrelated to g_assert() and therefore can handle re-entrancy.

If malloc aborts due to a double free or other similar problem, you may 
risk reentering it.

Paolo