What is stack unwinding?

Question

Stack unwinding is usually talked about in connection with exception handling. Here's an example:

void func( int x )
{
    char* pleak = new char[1024]; // might be lost => memory leak
    std::string s( "hello world" ); // will be properly destructed

    if ( x ) throw std::runtime_error( "boom" );

    delete [] pleak; // will only get here if x == 0. if x!=0, throw exception
}

int main()
{
    try
    {
        func( 10 );
    }
    catch ( const std::exception& e )
    {
        return 1;
    }

    return 0;
}

Here memory allocated for pleak will be lost if an exception is thrown, while memory allocated to s will be properly released by std::string destructor in any case. The objects allocated on the stack are "unwound" when the scope is exited (here the scope is of the function func.) This is done by the compiler inserting calls to destructors of automatic (stack) variables.

Now this is a very powerful concept leading to the technique called RAII, that is Resource Acquisition Is Initialization, that helps us manage resources like memory, database connections, open file descriptors, etc. in C++.

Now that allows us to provide exception safety guarantees.

All this relates to C++:

Definition: As you create objects statically (on the stack as opposed to allocating them in the heap memory) and perform function calls, they are "stacked up".

When a scope (anything delimited by { and }) is exited (by using return XXX;, reaching the end of the scope or throwing an exception) everything within that scope is destroyed (destructors are called for everything). This process of destroying local objects and calling destructors is called stack unwinding.

You have the following issues related to stack unwinding:

1. avoiding memory leaks (anything dynamically allocated that is not managed by a local object and cleaned up in the destructor will be leaked) - see RAII referred to by Nikolai, and the documentation for boost::scoped_ptr or this example of using boost::mutex::scoped_lock.

2. program consistency: the C++ specifications state that you should never throw an exception before any existing exception has been handled. This means that the stack unwinding process should never throw an exception (either use only code guaranteed not to throw in destructors, or surround everything in destructors with try { and } catch(...) {}).

If any destructor throws an exception during stack unwinding you end up in the land of undefined behavior which could cause your program to terminate unexpectedly (most common behavior) or the universe to end (theoretically possible but has not been observed in practice yet).

In a general sense, a stack "unwind" is pretty much synonymous with the end of a function call and the subsequent popping of the stack.

However, specifically in the case of C++, stack unwinding has to do with how C++ calls the destructors for the objects allocated since the started of any code block. Objects that were created within the block are deallocated in reverse order of their allocation.

I don't know if you read this yet, but Wikipedia's article on the call stack has a decent explanation.

Unwinding:

Returning from the called function will pop the top frame off of the stack, perhaps leaving a return value. The more general act of popping one or more frames off the stack to resume execution elsewhere in the program is called stack unwinding and must be performed when non-local control structures are used, such as those used for exception handling. In this case, the stack frame of a function contains one or more entries specifying exception handlers. When an exception is thrown, the stack is unwound until a handler is found that is prepared to handle (catch) the type of the thrown exception.

Some languages have other control structures that require general unwinding. Pascal allows a global goto statement to transfer control out of a nested function and into a previously invoked outer function. This operation requires the stack to be unwound, removing as many stack frames as necessary to restore the proper context to transfer control to the target statement within the enclosing outer function. Similarly, C has the setjmp and longjmp functions that act as non-local gotos. Common Lisp allows control of what happens when the stack is unwound by using the unwind-protect special operator.

When applying a continuation, the stack is (logically) unwound and then rewound with the stack of the continuation. This is not the only way to implement continuations; for example, using multiple, explicit stacks, application of a continuation can simply activate its stack and wind a value to be passed. The Scheme programming language allows arbitrary thunks to be executed in specified points on "unwinding" or "rewinding" of the control stack when a continuation is invoked.

Inspection[edit]