运行以下代码时，我得到StackOverflowException:

private void MyButton_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) {
  MyButton_Click_Aux();
}

private static volatile int reportCount;

private static void MyButton_Click_Aux() {
  try { /*remove because stack overflows without*/ }
  finally {
    var myLogData = new ArrayList();
    myLogData.Add(reportCount);
    myLogData.Add("method MyButtonClickAux");
    Log(myLogData);
  }
}

private static void Log(object logData) {
  // my log code is not matter
}

最佳答案

我知道如何阻止它的发生

我只是不知道为什么会导致它(至今)。看来您确实在.Net BCL中或更可能在JIT中发现了一个错误。

我只是注释掉了MyButton_Click_Aux方法中的所有行，然后开始将它们逐一引入。

从静态int中删除volatile，您将不再获得StackOverflowException。

现在要研究原因...很明显，与内存屏障有关的问题引起了问题-也许以某种方式迫使MyButton_Click_Aux方法自行调用...

更新

好的，所以其他人发现.Net 3.5不是问题。

我也使用.Nt 4，因此这些注释与此有关:

就像我说的，先去除 volatile ，然后再行之有效。

同样，如果重新打开 volatile 并删除try/final，它也可以工作:

private static void MyButton_Click_Aux()
{
  //try { /*remove because stack overflows without*/ }
  //finally
  //{
    var myLogData = new ArrayList(); 
    myLogData.Add(reportCount); 
    //myLogData.Add("method MyButtonClickAux");
    //Log(myLogData);
  //}
}  

private static void MyButton_Click_Aux()
{
  try { }
  finally
  {
    var myLogData = new ArrayList();
    Console.WriteLine(reportCount);
    //myLogData.Add("method MyButtonClickAux");
    //Log(myLogData);
  }
}

.maxstack 1
L_0000: leave.s L_0015
L_0002: newobj instance void [mscorlib]System.Collections.ArrayList::.ctor()
L_0007: pop 
L_0008: volatile. 
L_000a: ldsfld int32 modreq([mscorlib]System.Runtime.CompilerServices.IsVolatile) WindowsFormsApplication1.Form1::reportCount
L_000f: call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine(int32)
L_0014: endfinally 
L_0015: ret 
.try L_0000 to L_0002 finally handler L_0002 to L_0015

private static void MyButton_Click_Aux()
{
  try { }
  finally
  {
    var myLogData = new ArrayList();
    myLogData.Add(reportCount);
  }
}

.maxstack 2
.locals init (
    [0] class [mscorlib]System.Collections.ArrayList myLogData)
L_0000: leave.s L_001c
L_0002: newobj instance void [mscorlib]System.Collections.ArrayList::.ctor()
L_0007: stloc.0 
L_0008: ldloc.0 
L_0009: volatile. 
L_000b: ldsfld int32 modreq([mscorlib]System.Runtime.CompilerServices.IsVolatile) WindowsFormsApplication1.Form1::reportCount
L_0010: box int32
L_0015: callvirt instance int32 [mscorlib]System.Collections.ArrayList::Add(object)
L_001a: pop 
L_001b: endfinally 
L_001c: ret 
.try L_0000 to L_0002 finally handler L_0002 to L_001c

public class DoesNothingBase
{
  public void NonVirtualFooBox(object arg) { }
  public void NonVirtualFooNonBox(int arg) { }

  public virtual void FooBox(object arg) { }
  public virtual void FooNonBox(int arg) { }
}

public class DoesNothing : DoesNothingBase
{
  public override void FooBox(object arg) { }
  public override void FooNonBox(int arg) { }
}

try { }
finally
{
  var doesNothing = new DoesNothing();
  doesNothing.FooNonBox(reportCount);
}

try { }
finally
{
  var doesNothing = new DoesNothing();
  doesNothing.NonVirtualFooNonBox(reportCount);
}

try { }
finally
{
  var doesNothing = new DoesNothing();
  doesNothing.FooBox(reportCount);
}

try { }
finally
{
  var doesNothing = new DoesNothing();
  doesNothing.NonVirtualFooBox(reportCount);
}

Yes, it's fixed. We're in the process of figuring out how best to ship a fix. It is already fixed in 4.5, but we'd really like to fix a batch of code generation bugs prior to 4.5 release.

关于c# - 如何跟踪.NET中StackOverflowException的原因？，我们在Stack Overflow上找到一个类似的问题： https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4879835/