GNU bug report logs - #75322
SAFE_ALLOCA assumed to root Lisp_Objects/SSDATA(string)

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Gerd Möllmann <gerd.moellmann <at> gmail.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: Helmut Eller <eller.helmut <at> gmail.com>, pipcet <at> protonmail.com, 75322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#75322: SAFE_ALLOCA assumed to root Lisp_Objects/SSDATA(string)
Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2025 08:17:34 +0100

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

>> Cc: 75322 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>> From: Gerd Möllmann <gerd.moellmann <at> gmail.com>
>> Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2025 21:34:07 +0100
>> 
>> Gerd Möllmann <gerd.moellmann <at> gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> >
>> > The pointers to string data case probably requires adding yet another
>> > macro SAFE_ALLOCA_FIND_A_GOOD_NAME, which, for MPS, allocates a root,
>> > possibly and exact one which would be good.
>> 
>> Or one does it as you did in b0a209e9204, that's of course also safe.
>> For both old and new GC. (Don't remember if you mentioned it Pip, but
>> old GC moves string data as well, during string compaction, should GC
>> run).
>
> The current code in callproc.c assumes that GC cannot run while we are
> parked in posix_spawn or vfork.  Is that assumption false with MPS?
> If so, what would trigger GC during that time?

Okay, so it's safe with the old GC, I assume. Do you know if it is done
with an inhibit_garbage_collection? Not that we run into the trap that
somewhere on the way to the actual fork maybe_quit is called which can
GC and so on, like we had it in the regexp engine a while back.

For MPS, I don't know for sure. I have seen in passing while git
grepping in their repo recently, that they write something about forking
and child processes, but I don't know what they do. Maybe someone having
read the code can answer that. (Added Helmut in CC).

>
> Another question is about the global Lisp variables in 'globals'.  For
> example, Vprocess_environment actually globals.f_Vprocess_environment.
> Is this large struct protected from GC, i.e. can GC ever decide that
> process-environment is not used and free it?  If it's protected, where
> and how is it protected?  And if it is protected, then any members of
> the list that is the value of process-environment are also protected
> and cannot be freed by GC.
>
> If 'globals' is not protected, I think we should protect it, no?

process-environment is a DEFVAR_LISP, and is root in both GCs via the
staticpro mechanism (staticvec array).

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.