Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ICE on extremely deeply nested syntax #34844

Closed
DemiMarie opened this issue Jul 16, 2016 · 1 comment · Fixed by #55617
Closed

ICE on extremely deeply nested syntax #34844

DemiMarie opened this issue Jul 16, 2016 · 1 comment · Fixed by #55617
Labels
C-bug Category: This is a bug. I-ICE Issue: The compiler panicked, giving an Internal Compilation Error (ICE) ❄️ T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.

Comments

@DemiMarie
Copy link
Contributor

DemiMarie commented Jul 16, 2016

The following shell scripts all cause a stack overflow in the compiler:

python -c 'print("("*100000 + ")"*100000)'| rustc /dev/fd/0
python -c 'print("{"*100000 + "}"*100000)'| rustc /dev/fd/0
python -c 'print("{("*100000 + "})"*100000)'| rustc /dev/fd/0

This should be fixed (perhaps by making the parser non-recursive, or by setting an explicit recursion limit).

@DemiMarie DemiMarie changed the title ICE on extremely deeply nested tuples ICE on extremely deeply nested syntax Jul 16, 2016
@apasel422 apasel422 added the I-ICE Issue: The compiler panicked, giving an Internal Compilation Error (ICE) ❄️ label Dec 28, 2016
@Mark-Simulacrum Mark-Simulacrum added the C-bug Category: This is a bug. label Jul 22, 2017
@steveklabnik
Copy link
Member

This feels like a duplicate of #32594

bors added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 6, 2018
Prevent compiler stack overflow for deeply recursive code

I was unable to write a test that

1. runs in under 1s
2. overflows on my machine without this patch

The following reproduces the issue, but I don't think it's sensible to include a test that takes 30s to compile. We can now easily squash newly appearing overflows by the strategic insertion of calls to `ensure_sufficient_stack`.

```rust
// compile-pass

#![recursion_limit="1000000"]

macro_rules! chain {
    (EE $e:expr) => {$e.sin()};
    (RECURSE $i:ident $e:expr) => {chain!($i chain!($i chain!($i chain!($i $e))))};
    (Z $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE EE $e)};
    (Y $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE Z $e)};
    (X $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE Y $e)};
    (A $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE X $e)};
    (B $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE A $e)};
    (C $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE B $e)};
    // causes overflow on x86_64 linux
    // less than 1 second until overflow on test machine
    // after overflow has been fixed, takes 30s to compile :/
    (D $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE C $e)};
    (E $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE D $e)};
    (F $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE E $e)};
    // more than 10 seconds
    (G $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE F $e)};
    (H $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE G $e)};
    (I $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE H $e)};
    (J $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE I $e)};
    (K $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE J $e)};
    (L $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE L $e)};
}

fn main() {
    let x = chain!(D 42.0_f32);
}
```

fixes #55471
fixes #41884
fixes #40161
fixes #34844
fixes #32594

cc @alexcrichton @rust-lang/compiler

I looked at all code that checks the recursion limit and inserted stack growth calls where appropriate.
bors added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 13, 2018
Prevent compiler stack overflow for deeply recursive code

I was unable to write a test that

1. runs in under 1s
2. overflows on my machine without this patch

The following reproduces the issue, but I don't think it's sensible to include a test that takes 30s to compile. We can now easily squash newly appearing overflows by the strategic insertion of calls to `ensure_sufficient_stack`.

```rust
// compile-pass

#![recursion_limit="1000000"]

macro_rules! chain {
    (EE $e:expr) => {$e.sin()};
    (RECURSE $i:ident $e:expr) => {chain!($i chain!($i chain!($i chain!($i $e))))};
    (Z $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE EE $e)};
    (Y $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE Z $e)};
    (X $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE Y $e)};
    (A $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE X $e)};
    (B $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE A $e)};
    (C $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE B $e)};
    // causes overflow on x86_64 linux
    // less than 1 second until overflow on test machine
    // after overflow has been fixed, takes 30s to compile :/
    (D $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE C $e)};
    (E $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE D $e)};
    (F $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE E $e)};
    // more than 10 seconds
    (G $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE F $e)};
    (H $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE G $e)};
    (I $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE H $e)};
    (J $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE I $e)};
    (K $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE J $e)};
    (L $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE L $e)};
}

fn main() {
    let x = chain!(D 42.0_f32);
}
```

fixes #55471
fixes #41884
fixes #40161
fixes #34844
fixes #32594

cc @alexcrichton @rust-lang/compiler

I looked at all code that checks the recursion limit and inserted stack growth calls where appropriate.
@Centril Centril added the T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label Mar 10, 2020
Centril added a commit to Centril/rust that referenced this issue Mar 18, 2020
Prevent compiler stack overflow for deeply recursive code

I was unable to write a test that

1. runs in under 1s
2. overflows on my machine without this patch

The following reproduces the issue, but I don't think it's sensible to include a test that takes 30s to compile. We can now easily squash newly appearing overflows by the strategic insertion of calls to `ensure_sufficient_stack`.

```rust
// compile-pass

#![recursion_limit="1000000"]

macro_rules! chain {
    (EE $e:expr) => {$e.sin()};
    (RECURSE $i:ident $e:expr) => {chain!($i chain!($i chain!($i chain!($i $e))))};
    (Z $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE EE $e)};
    (Y $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE Z $e)};
    (X $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE Y $e)};
    (A $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE X $e)};
    (B $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE A $e)};
    (C $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE B $e)};
    // causes overflow on x86_64 linux
    // less than 1 second until overflow on test machine
    // after overflow has been fixed, takes 30s to compile :/
    (D $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE C $e)};
    (E $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE D $e)};
    (F $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE E $e)};
    // more than 10 seconds
    (G $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE F $e)};
    (H $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE G $e)};
    (I $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE H $e)};
    (J $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE I $e)};
    (K $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE J $e)};
    (L $e:expr) => {chain!(RECURSE L $e)};
}

fn main() {
    let x = chain!(D 42.0_f32);
}
```

fixes rust-lang#55471
fixes rust-lang#41884
fixes rust-lang#40161
fixes rust-lang#34844
fixes rust-lang#32594

cc @alexcrichton @rust-lang/compiler

I looked at all code that checks the recursion limit and inserted stack growth calls where appropriate.
@bors bors closed this as completed in 97f3eee May 7, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
C-bug Category: This is a bug. I-ICE Issue: The compiler panicked, giving an Internal Compilation Error (ICE) ❄️ T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

5 participants