Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #87313
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c++ |
| Subject | Re: Windows does overcommit stacks ! |
| Date | 2022-11-10 14:08 +0100 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <tkit4e$i7ub$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <tkhqdn$fho3$1@dont-email.me> <5194adaf-d276-4fdb-b422-55e4a6ed5d70n@googlegroups.com> <tkio2e$hqak$1@dont-email.me> <9cae8649-0e8f-458b-af14-39616a1d9cbbn@googlegroups.com> |
Am 10.11.2022 um 13:34 schrieb Michael S: > Ones again, you don't know the meaning of 'overcommit'. > As long as area that was successfully committed either by > VirtualAlloc(..., MEM_COMMIT, ...) or by other means is > guaranteed to be legal to access from user mode, it's not > called 'overcommitment' even when the process of access > begins by page fault. With stacks things are different. The commit is done by the kernel when you hit the guard page. If you touch the stack's address range beyond the guard page the application crashes. If the kernel can't dynamically commit the memory for the guard page you hit you get a SEH guard page exeption - earlier than with the last valid position of the guard page when the stack "successfully" extends to its maximum range. So if you have a default stack size of one MB, you might get one MB minus the size of the (last) guard page, but this actually might not happen if the system runs out of memor meanwhile.
Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Windows does overcommit stacks ! Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-11-10 04:16 +0100
Re: Windows does overcommit stacks ! yx ma <myxfxtstart@gmail.com> - 2022-11-09 23:32 -0800
Re: Windows does overcommit stacks ! Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2022-11-10 02:59 -0800
Re: Windows does overcommit stacks ! Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-11-10 12:42 +0100
Re: Windows does overcommit stacks ! Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2022-11-10 04:34 -0800
Re: Windows does overcommit stacks ! Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-11-10 14:08 +0100
Re: Windows does overcommit stacks ! Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-11-10 05:18 -0800
Re: Windows does overcommit stacks ! Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-11-10 14:36 +0100
Re: Windows does overcommit stacks ! Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-11-14 22:03 +0100
Re: Windows does overcommit stacks ! Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-11-15 04:09 -0800
Re: Windows does overcommit stacks ! Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-11-15 14:23 +0100
Re: Windows does overcommit stacks ! Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2022-11-15 06:23 -0800
Re: Windows does overcommit stacks ! Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2022-11-15 16:39 +0100
Re: Windows does overcommit stacks ! Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-03-20 18:45 +0100
csiph-web