From unknown Sat Aug 09 15:56:39 2025 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.509 (Entity 5.509) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 From: bug#31919 <31919@debbugs.gnu.org> To: bug#31919 <31919@debbugs.gnu.org> Subject: Status: 26.1.50; Lisp Debugger doesn't work when at stack limit Reply-To: bug#31919 <31919@debbugs.gnu.org> Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2025 22:56:39 +0000 retitle 31919 26.1.50; Lisp Debugger doesn't work when at stack limit reassign 31919 emacs submitter 31919 Gemini Lasswell severity 31919 minor tag 31919 fixed thanks From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jun 20 20:06:14 2018 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Jun 2018 00:06:14 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58076 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fVn78-0001K3-8C for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 20:06:14 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:34180) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fVn75-0001Jf-Qr for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 20:06:12 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fVn6z-0000Ej-4p for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 20:06:06 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,FREEMAIL_FROM, T_DKIM_INVALID autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::11]:33973) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fVn6y-0000EZ-W9 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 20:06:05 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53369) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fVn6x-00089j-ON for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 20:06:04 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fVn6s-00007H-Nw for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 20:06:03 -0400 Received: from aibo.runbox.com ([91.220.196.211]:42078) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fVn6s-00006A-B5 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 20:05:58 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=runbox.com; s=rbselector1; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:Subject:To:From; bh=svaKGTrtXrkyOMjtAsKcp039RPh3jUurrO5BTBdsZv4=; b=J5zL7EgpO+/KkSycrbp+RGjzs u86HEdF63FShS5CIk1Mk/67Vi95Pew/Rs3rp0XABJSx3dBS+VZQss+nAyaWN1qTLX+yr8UIA30buA 5HJbilC5w+W9p58UWHbrrFYWPxKziltTSu+taouNpfAVOgS0qxMrJmEMbeUQkJjFJnt8je/wYrd98 DOWc9Cg5fOvASElfZT2hpPi2i0APw9xsnIFz3m42B8y+g3np7TOor0Y9H4Eyicvme/Bu4+9bbZcCG Arwv9rYpoazGb7RlvUOGoDapJ+OvfTn0haSzaZY6Ehwv57hARzdM75tm1p7t7STLfLWZqLuXkm+8t gJA47SVZw==; Received: from [10.9.9.210] (helo=mailfront10.runbox.com) by mailtransmit03.runbox with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fVn6p-0006wB-PD for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 02:05:55 +0200 Received: from c-24-22-244-161.hsd1.wa.comcast.net ([24.22.244.161] helo=chinook) by mailfront10.runbox.com with esmtpsa (uid:179284 ) (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) id 1fVn6l-0005MF-Ns for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 02:05:52 +0200 From: Gemini Lasswell To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Subject: 26.1.50; Lisp Debugger doesn't work when at stack limit Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 17:05:41 -0700 Message-ID: <87a7rprokq.fsf@runbox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-=" X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::11 X-Spam-Score: -4.1 (----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -5.1 (-----) --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable When max-lisp-eval-depth is exceeded and that error invokes the Lisp Debugger, it prints an error message, doesn't produce a backtrace, and leaves Emacs in a borked state. In Emacs 25.3.1, the Debugger works in this situation although the rest of Emacs doesn't work well due to being near the stack limit, but you can exit the Debugger and things will go back to normal. The reason for the regression is that backtrace printing is now done in Lisp, in cl-print, instead of in C. If cl-print isn't yet loaded, being at the stack limit can cause it to fail to load. To reproduce, from emacs -Q, enter this code into a buffer and evaluate it: (toggle-debug-on-error) (defun my-func (arg) (+ (length arg) (my-func arg))) (my-func "hello") Result: Instead of the *Backtrace* buffer, Emacs instead shows *Compile-Log*, which in my case contains: /nix/store/s6ji5vn6jbsjpp6wwbix2daigkcsvj7h-emacs-26.1.50/share/emacs/26.1.= 50/lisp/emacs-lisp/cl-print.elc:Error: Lisp nesting exceeds =E2=80=98max-li= sp-eval-depth=E2=80=99 In the echo area, this message appears: cl--generic-make-next-function: Symbol=E2=80=99s function definition is voi= d: t Emacs is at this point barely usable because it is inside the debugger's recursive edit and at its stack limit, making max-lisp-eval-depth errors easy to encounter. The *Backtrace* buffer exists but is empty and in Fundamental mode, so you can't use it to quit the debugger. You can recover from the situation with M-x top-level RET. If cl-print is already loaded the above example will work, but if you evaluate the following, the Debugger buffer will appear with a truncated backtrace: (my-func '(1 (2 (3 (4 (5 (6 (7 (8))))))))) Here's a patch to give the Debugger and cl-print more stack space during the recursive edit: --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline; filename=0001-Increase-max-lisp-eval-depth-adjustment-while-in-deb.patch >From d044dc12a2b5794bd1155fd5b7ff7adb3bc8841d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Gemini Lasswell Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 13:58:33 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] Increase max-lisp-eval-depth adjustment while in debugger * src/eval.c (call_debugger): Increase the amount of extra stack depth given to the debugger to allow it to call cl-print. --- src/eval.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/eval.c b/src/eval.c index ca1eb84ff3..f9bc13ade7 100644 --- a/src/eval.c +++ b/src/eval.c @@ -282,8 +282,8 @@ call_debugger (Lisp_Object arg) /* Do not allow max_specpdl_size less than actual depth (Bug#16603). */ EMACS_INT old_max = max (max_specpdl_size, count); - if (lisp_eval_depth + 40 > max_lisp_eval_depth) - max_lisp_eval_depth = lisp_eval_depth + 40; + if (lisp_eval_depth + 80 > max_lisp_eval_depth) + max_lisp_eval_depth = lisp_eval_depth + 80; /* While debugging Bug#16603, previous value of 100 was found too small to avoid specpdl overflow in the debugger itself. */ -- 2.16.4 --=-=-=-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jun 27 13:17:19 2018 Received: (at 31919) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Jun 2018 17:17:19 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37851 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fYE4F-0004Gd-HE for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 13:17:19 -0400 Received: from aibo.runbox.com ([91.220.196.211]:48586) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fYE4C-0004GS-Ei for 31919@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 13:17:17 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=runbox.com; s=rbselector1; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date: References:Subject:To:From; bh=yV4OGjrBOii5O53UWKftijIHrd0VSpOGocvkHPLCRGs=; b=H//6TFIWCbqaAbxQMSQ6UFMAwsGz0SQaBa3AkAU+zkfp4qX7U4Jg0USUkrnTwo+MyA6SWAFMUI WRpy+fEKuqA+IVTerArzb0wmdM+dJ1A65R1WOJtfKoGIG2kIsDa+6Qdh2wItRNFI3nZ06/YIKUjHh YU3OBKVKgR60yZ0Nyaq/oc1NeiyIs/JKHr8lRjOcatfN2+R1ZeL44EXffH8poQCjostXzDCSdqDte ctIy01udWGnEDgLFa77jFL+jO+oCCUeM50LZWPZOI6+xDqiBZkLlXO5/XiMaXRHBser9f49xinUTY AMtOogbFdclcDcwRhBC/uB9fC5fbmf/qHwCqw==; Received: from [10.9.9.212] (helo=mailfront12.runbox.com) by mailtransmit03.runbox with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fYE4B-0005KS-74 for 31919@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 19:17:15 +0200 Received: from c-24-22-244-161.hsd1.wa.comcast.net ([24.22.244.161] helo=chinook) by mailfront12.runbox.com with esmtpsa (uid:179284 ) (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) id 1fYE3v-0008Ot-MT for 31919@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 19:17:00 +0200 From: Gemini Lasswell To: 31919@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: bug#31919: 26.1.50; Lisp Debugger doesn't work when at stack limit References: <87a7rprokq.fsf@runbox.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 10:16:57 -0700 In-Reply-To: <87a7rprokq.fsf@runbox.com> (Gemini Lasswell's message of "Wed, 20 Jun 2018 17:05:41 -0700") Message-ID: <87vaa4f8ty.fsf@runbox.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 31919 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) Is this patch OK for emacs-26? > Here's a patch to give the Debugger and cl-print more stack space > during the recursive edit: > >>>From d044dc12a2b5794bd1155fd5b7ff7adb3bc8841d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Gemini Lasswell > Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 13:58:33 -0700 > Subject: [PATCH] Increase max-lisp-eval-depth adjustment while in debugger > > * src/eval.c (call_debugger): Increase the amount of extra stack > depth given to the debugger to allow it to call cl-print. > --- > src/eval.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/src/eval.c b/src/eval.c > index ca1eb84ff3..f9bc13ade7 100644 > --- a/src/eval.c > +++ b/src/eval.c > @@ -282,8 +282,8 @@ call_debugger (Lisp_Object arg) > /* Do not allow max_specpdl_size less than actual depth (Bug#16603). */ > EMACS_INT old_max = max (max_specpdl_size, count); > > - if (lisp_eval_depth + 40 > max_lisp_eval_depth) > - max_lisp_eval_depth = lisp_eval_depth + 40; > + if (lisp_eval_depth + 80 > max_lisp_eval_depth) > + max_lisp_eval_depth = lisp_eval_depth + 80; > > /* While debugging Bug#16603, previous value of 100 was found > too small to avoid specpdl overflow in the debugger itself. */ From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jun 27 13:37:53 2018 Received: (at 31919) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Jun 2018 17:37:53 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37861 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fYEO9-0004kH-6V for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 13:37:53 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:53312) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fYEO7-0004k5-N2 for 31919@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 13:37:52 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fYENz-0003xl-BA for 31919@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 13:37:46 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:51786) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fYENz-0003xP-7i; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 13:37:43 -0400 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=2717 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1fYENy-0005Re-G1; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 13:37:43 -0400 Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 20:37:47 +0300 Message-Id: <83vaa4p1uc.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Gemini Lasswell In-reply-to: <87vaa4f8ty.fsf@runbox.com> (message from Gemini Lasswell on Wed, 27 Jun 2018 10:16:57 -0700) Subject: Re: bug#31919: 26.1.50; Lisp Debugger doesn't work when at stack limit References: <87a7rprokq.fsf@runbox.com> <87vaa4f8ty.fsf@runbox.com> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 31919 Cc: 31919@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -6.0 (------) > From: Gemini Lasswell > Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 10:16:57 -0700 > > Is this patch OK for emacs-26? Yes, but please add a comment there describing the reason. How much more depth out of 40 is actually needed to allow cl-print calls, and how much is safety margin? From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jun 28 00:26:30 2018 Received: (at 31919) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Jun 2018 04:26:30 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38074 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fYOVp-0000u9-W8 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 00:26:30 -0400 Received: from aibo.runbox.com ([91.220.196.211]:50586) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fYOVn-0000u0-T4 for 31919@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 00:26:28 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=runbox.com; s=rbselector1; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date: References:Subject:Cc:To:From; bh=LoAixAuUO9Ov07O3MAXmcbv7BjcX+CDoZETNaSybvhY=; b=P9lasiSKdPqJO3MQD8RgsGPjf2 2nOPEmBqiClba2IE6pCt3nEw+n0JIinZ08bhhwSc1+hYVgvhd9eK0hvs7jgZGnW6cLK+zAQl6YwC+ wHe/YvMKoD7jBZ4FewxaR68FiVnUhFZ8gz2fzcvMUA5CkKBKJkSCENPD/D7gVftBFN5OmB6yNtBvB 5Ibn2eLV/vMQGVsRwNfhwXzqCyIKdRoqNFF6jGlswX3Kz3vWD+5eYbMEpGZOQvqzLWUTyIA7/IwgY N95K7dak59CZRgRWoxMCbvyS7nG/0MOcY1c52H4E99W3seg5G2dpyS+fCejExMb4Q6UykyyuWxl1/ Vj/F8r7A==; Received: from [10.9.9.210] (helo=mailfront10.runbox.com) by mailtransmit03.runbox with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fYOVm-00045j-GF; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 06:26:26 +0200 Received: from c-24-22-244-161.hsd1.wa.comcast.net ([24.22.244.161] helo=chinook) by mailfront10.runbox.com with esmtpsa (uid:179284 ) (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) id 1fYOVa-0004at-9M; Thu, 28 Jun 2018 06:26:14 +0200 From: Gemini Lasswell To: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#31919: 26.1.50; Lisp Debugger doesn't work when at stack limit References: <87a7rprokq.fsf@runbox.com> <87vaa4f8ty.fsf@runbox.com> <83vaa4p1uc.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 21:26:12 -0700 In-Reply-To: <83vaa4p1uc.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 27 Jun 2018 20:37:47 +0300") Message-ID: <87r2krfsez.fsf@runbox.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-=" X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 31919 Cc: 31919@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Eli Zaretskii writes: > Yes, but please add a comment there describing the reason. How much > more depth out of 40 is actually needed to allow cl-print calls, and > how much is safety margin? I determined by experiment that 77 needs to be added to max-lisp-eval-depth to permit the debugger to print ((1 (2 (3 (4 (5 (6 (7 (8))))))))). So I changed the increment to 100. But I really have no idea what is reasonable for a safety margin. Here's a new patch with comments. --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline; filename=0001-Increase-max-lisp-eval-depth-adjustment-while-in-deb.patch >From ab293d12ef045042b62df7670cf9fe05f175ce19 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Gemini Lasswell Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 13:58:33 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] Increase max-lisp-eval-depth adjustment while in debugger * src/eval.c (call_debugger): Increase the amount of extra Lisp evaluation depth given to the debugger to allow it to call cl-print. * lisp/emacs-lisp/debug.el (debugger-setup-buffer): Add a comment to suggest updating call_debugger when changing print-level. --- lisp/emacs-lisp/debug.el | 1 + src/eval.c | 8 ++++++-- 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/lisp/emacs-lisp/debug.el b/lisp/emacs-lisp/debug.el index 593fab9727..821d674882 100644 --- a/lisp/emacs-lisp/debug.el +++ b/lisp/emacs-lisp/debug.el @@ -322,6 +322,7 @@ debugger-setup-buffer (backtrace-frames 'debug))) (print-escape-newlines t) (print-escape-control-characters t) + ;; If you increase print-level, add more depth in call_debugger. (print-level 8) (print-length 50) (pos (point))) diff --git a/src/eval.c b/src/eval.c index ca1eb84ff3..40cba3bb1c 100644 --- a/src/eval.c +++ b/src/eval.c @@ -282,8 +282,12 @@ call_debugger (Lisp_Object arg) /* Do not allow max_specpdl_size less than actual depth (Bug#16603). */ EMACS_INT old_max = max (max_specpdl_size, count); - if (lisp_eval_depth + 40 > max_lisp_eval_depth) - max_lisp_eval_depth = lisp_eval_depth + 40; + /* The previous value of 40 is too small now that the debugger + prints using cl-prin1 instead of prin1. Printing lists nested 8 + deep (which is the value of print-level used in the debugger) + currently requires 77 additional frames. See bug#31919. */ + if (lisp_eval_depth + 100 > max_lisp_eval_depth) + max_lisp_eval_depth = lisp_eval_depth + 100; /* While debugging Bug#16603, previous value of 100 was found too small to avoid specpdl overflow in the debugger itself. */ -- 2.16.4 --=-=-=-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jun 30 05:39:33 2018 Received: (at 31919) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Jun 2018 09:39:33 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40356 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fZCLt-0000x2-D3 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 05:39:33 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:45041) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fZCLs-0000wq-Hp for 31919@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 05:39:32 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fZCLi-0008Lu-Em for 31919@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 05:39:27 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:58739) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fZCLi-0008Lp-AF; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 05:39:22 -0400 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=4986 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1fZCLh-0006cj-NK; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 05:39:22 -0400 Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2018 12:39:32 +0300 Message-Id: <83muvcmx4b.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Gemini Lasswell In-reply-to: <87r2krfsez.fsf@runbox.com> (message from Gemini Lasswell on Wed, 27 Jun 2018 21:26:12 -0700) Subject: Re: bug#31919: 26.1.50; Lisp Debugger doesn't work when at stack limit References: <87a7rprokq.fsf@runbox.com> <87vaa4f8ty.fsf@runbox.com> <83vaa4p1uc.fsf@gnu.org> <87r2krfsez.fsf@runbox.com> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 31919 Cc: 31919@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -6.0 (------) > From: Gemini Lasswell > Cc: 31919@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 21:26:12 -0700 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > Yes, but please add a comment there describing the reason. How much > > more depth out of 40 is actually needed to allow cl-print calls, and > > how much is safety margin? > > I determined by experiment that 77 needs to be added to > max-lisp-eval-depth to permit the debugger to print > ((1 (2 (3 (4 (5 (6 (7 (8))))))))). So I changed the increment to 100. > But I really have no idea what is reasonable for a safety margin. > Here's a new patch with comments. Thanks, this LGTM for emacs-26. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jun 30 10:43:07 2018 Received: (at control) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Jun 2018 14:43:07 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41382 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fZH5f-0001on-EX for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 10:43:07 -0400 Received: from aibo.runbox.com ([91.220.196.211]:52874) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fZH5d-0001of-H7 for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 10:43:06 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=runbox.com; s=rbselector1; h=Subject:From:To:Message-Id:Date; bh=RPX0oo2NF/F8Bk2TFSU6aU2nMP8nJwIkxKhjOSiITwk=; b=JFbCNUmDFdwrokseaiqEHCcNjM xfclDnwaN8CgiUM0+Syyz0/J4hpdWvjke/iGETImlb3uS+o4xD/dmeqEFTlx6FMILjj6xOd7Zp0cc IL5bqYP0JqMVU1iSXpbeFIlC4sPidR1XJwl7wOrUAI7fVkalmrOuDkob0J64Z1pnLLHtekjv1a73x US+vYPlynnt+cHKnh42glkW/HAKKCciOgwCVLnnNmkeibPfZ5E47zaxgzmLa1GZzSWgb0X5tF+evh JvJpI5ZJWeY9Ns/4SRP6M4l4sCBiDLWpYHfptsa0XHlcb2PzrDR4cztNJG0d8EtzYrWxGy2z2JNZQ Uh6xCIVA==; Received: from [10.9.9.210] (helo=mailfront10.runbox.com) by mailtransmit02.runbox with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fZH5c-00055y-8e for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 16:43:04 +0200 Received: from 67-40-15-154.tukw.qwest.net ([67.40.15.154] helo=sockeye) by mailfront10.runbox.com with esmtpsa (uid:179284 ) (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) id 1fZH55-0001Am-Lz for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 16:42:32 +0200 Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2018 07:42:28 -0700 Message-Id: <871scoibe3.fsf@runbox.com> To: control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Gemini Lasswell Subject: control message for bug #31919 X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: control X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) tags 31919 fixed close 31919 26.2 From unknown Sat Aug 09 15:56:39 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2018 11:24:04 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator