Boost logo

Boost :

From: Jim Douglas (jim_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-03-03 02:14:14

Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
>>In brief, the primary execution failure corrupts the program heap. When
>>the C++ exception is thrown at execution_monitor:462, the exception
>>handling mechanism calls __cxa_allocate_exception which then calls
>>std::malloc. But, because of the corrupted heap, this call blocks
>>against the malloc mutex.
> Is there any way to avoid memory allocation?

Yes, don't throw an exception. It is the system that is allocating
memory for the exception.

> The exception itself doesn't allocate the memory (namely for the reasons above).

Oh yes it does. Before you can throw an exception you have to create one
and that will involve a call to new, which in most cases results in a
call to malloc.


> You could disable catching system errors for this test or this configuration
> (using either command line argument or environment variable).

I am trying to make a general point here that the code is badly designed
and is prone to failure on any OS, not just QNX. To use a simple analogy
you are currently asking a mortally wounded soldier to get back in the
front line and continue to fight. A memory segment violation _may_
cripple a process. There is _no_guarantee_ that following a memory
segment violation a process is in a fit state to continue execution.
Don't you remember the good old days when a memory segment violation
under Windows would wipe out the entire OS :-)

See also Ian McCulloch's post that backs me up.

BTW the specific case has been dealt with by withdrawing the test. I
just want to make sure this does not happen again to anyone.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at