On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 03:12:53PM +0000, Nick Clifton wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> > I think this points toward the limit being _much_ too low.
>
> Fair enough - several other people have said this as well. So
> I have proposed an alternative patch instead. My current suggestion
> is to raise the limit to 2048, which allows the libiberty patch to
> pass. But do you have a feel for how much is a realistic limit ?
For recursion limit I think that is fine.
For just stack size limit, I think it is extremely small.
I see that in the function it allocates on 64-bit 24 bytes times
num_comps using alloca, so 48 bytes per character in the mangled name,
and a pointer for each character in the mangled name.
That is 112KB per 2048 bytes long mangled name.
Dunno how much stack can we expect to be usable.
Jakub
