Re: A quit strange coredump

In article <1150097242.494159.5790@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
tomy <tomyling@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
But I still hold a question: What the exactly amount of stack memory
the process can take. On the 32bit machine, the stack's virtual memory
is like 0x4000000 ~ 0xc000000, that's 800M.isn't it?

Depends on the operating system. On the 32 bit machine I'm using
now, I could probably push the stack up to 1.2 Gb, possibly even more.

My computer has
500M(add 1G swap memory)physically, however I could only allocate about
110M in the stack. that's funny?

Operating system dependant. Stacks are sometimes placed below shared
libraries, with the heap being above the shared libraries; on such
systems, the available room for the stack or heap would depend on
the shared library sizes and positions. And of course not all systems
use stacks or heaps.

And How could i find the fresh memory
to use, without maintain the total amount?

If you want to know how much more memory you could allocate, then the
only portable way is to keep allocating memory until you run out.
Unfortunately doing that might have adverse effects on your program or
other things happening on your system, so that's not a very good
method.

Questions about available memory to allocate are often fairly
complex to answer; you really need someone who specializes in
your platform (i.e., in a different newsgroup.)
--
All is vanity. -- Ecclesiastes
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: If Macs have no spyware....
    ... >had made a complete code review of its operating system and removed all ... and writing new data into those memory locations would ... >but when the data exists on the stack, it can cause very large problems. ... >location that needs to be written in place of the correct execution ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: If Macs have no spyware....
    ... First you yammer about being a Mac advocate, then bad mouth me for dumping XP in favor of a Mac. ... Supposedly Microsoft had made a complete code review of its operating system and removed all the buffers which could overflow. ... the fundamental problem is that the basic architecture of Windows has two fatal flaws in its memory management and while these remain in the software the ad hoc patches will never be enough to make Windows a secure operating system. ... These problems are bad enough when dealing with data in the one routine but when the data exists on the stack, it can cause very large problems. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: run-time vs compile-time
    ... > offset related to some location (like stack base) somewhere. ... > offset from heap to pi. ... When you allocate an int on the heap, it is allocated at address 1. ... application has a given amount of memory it can use as it wishes. ...
    (alt.comp.lang.learn.c-cpp)
  • Re: run-time vs compile-time
    ... > offset related to some location (like stack base) somewhere. ... > offset from heap to pi. ... When you allocate an int on the heap, it is allocated at address 1. ... application has a given amount of memory it can use as it wishes. ...
    (comp.lang.cpp)
  • Re: Doubt on Stack variables.
    ... Will it allocate memory for all the char's together or allocate for ... this only second char in the function gets memory. ... As other posters have pointed out, the notion of a "stack" does not appear ... the stack limits) would run into these limits. ...
    (comp.lang.c)