Tweet
Question on stack frames and overlapping procedures and stuff like that
Say that I've compiled a procedure with a relative offset of O. Is there anything preventing me from calling the procedure (rather, a truncated version of the procedure) using a relative offset of O+x? I don't see anything in the Intel architecture specification that would disallow this, but it's possible that something besides the architecture (e.g., the operating system or the assembler) might disallow something like this...
-
<p style="font-size:1024px">HTML is disabled in signatures
</p> -
None shall pass! -
I know all those words yet none of it makes any sense.Exult in your existence, because that very process has blundered unwittingly on its own negation. Only a small, local negation, to be sure: only one species, and only a minority of that species; but there lies hope. [...] Stand tall, Bipedal Ape. The shark may outswim you, the cheetah outrun you, the swift outfly you, the capuchin outclimb you, the elephant outpower you, the redwood outlast you. But you have the biggest gifts of all: the gift of understanding the ruthlessly cruel process that gave us all existence [and the] gift of revulsion against its implications.
-Richard DawkinsComment
-
You need to take enlargment pills for your e-penis.<p style="font-size:1024px">HTML is disabled in signatures </p>Comment
-
-
You need to ask at a forum that is more nerdish than this one i.e. you can get no answer.Comment
-
Re: Question on stack frames and overlapping procedures and stuff like that
Assuming the procedures are all part of the same process, that should be allowed. It would segfault if it doesn't have proper permissions.Originally posted by loinburger
Say that I've compiled a procedure with a relative offset of O. Is there anything preventing me from calling the procedure (rather, a truncated version of the procedure) using a relative offset of O+x? I don't see anything in the Intel architecture specification that would disallow this, but it's possible that something besides the architecture (e.g., the operating system or the assembler) might disallow something like this...
It doesn't strike me as a particularly brilliant thing to do, though..."The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "Comment
-
Segfault sucks.
Segfault just means "something ****ed up and I don't want to tell you what it is"
At least that's my understanding of it.12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
Stadtluft Macht Frei
Killing it is the new killing it
Ultima Ratio RegumComment
-
It means the process tried to access memory outside of its allocated segment (segmenetation fault)."The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "Comment
-
I'm asking because all of the papers I've read on precondition elimination wind up cloning the hell out of the procedures -- it would be easier to justify precondition elimination if you didn't double the program's size in the process.Originally posted by Asher
It doesn't strike me as a particularly brilliant thing to do, though...<p style="font-size:1024px">HTML is disabled in signatures </p>Comment
-
Or wait for Asher. Duh.Originally posted by Ecthy
You need to ask at a forum that is more nerdish than this one i.e. you can get no answer.Comment
-
No, segfault = your pointers suck.Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Segfault sucks.
Segfault just means "something ****ed up and I don't want to tell you what it is"
At least that's my understanding of it.Comment
-
Which can be masked by a bunch of other problems...array out of bounds exceptions, off-by-one errors, etc.Originally posted by Kuciwalker
No, segfault = your pointers suck."The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "Comment
-
What Kuci said. Also, I hate tech forums -- in my experience the posters are almost all of the "if you've got a hammer then every problem turns into a nail" variety.Originally posted by Ecthy
You need to ask at a forum that is more nerdish than this one i.e. you can get no answer.<p style="font-size:1024px">HTML is disabled in signatures </p>Comment
-
Such as?
All I ever noticed was their "help" is usually hints like "turn on your computer. what, it still doesn't work?" or it's like "yeah, that module p2:a3h works only wit hthe schnorx procedure blabla". no proper help for normal people there.Comment
Comment