Re: [Linux-ia64] Pagesize is different between IA32 and IA64

["Hideki Yamamoto" <hideki@hpc.bs1.fc.nec.co.jp>]

 Hi Don.
 Thank you very much! I greatly appreciate your kindness.

At Tue, 13 Nov 2001 23:43:55 -0700,
Dugger's wrote:
> 
> Never mind, I found the `calloc' code and I'm very depressed because it
> does indeed assume that `brk' zeros out newly allocated memory which is
> obviously going to create problems if `calloc' thinks the kernel has 4K
> pages when it really has bigger ones.
> 
> Unfortunately, this means I'll have to make an IA32 specific `brk' call that
> zero's out the last part of the last page currently allocated to a process.
> Oh well, patch to follow later.
> --
> Don Dugger
> n0ano@indstorage.com
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dugger's" <ddugger@qwest.net>
> To: <davidm@hpl.hp.com>; <n0ano@indstorage.com>
> Cc: "Hideki Yamamoto" <hideki@hpc.bs1.fc.nec.co.jp>;
> <linux-ia64@linuxia64.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 11:16 PM
> Subject: Re: [Linux-ia64] Pagesize is different between IA32 and IA64
> 
> 
> > I'm a little confused.  From Hideki's test program the problem actually
> > seems
> > to be using `sbrk' to return memory and then allocating memory again.  The
> > second
> > time the re-allocated memory is not zeroed, e.g.:
> >
> >     p = sbrk(4096);
> >     q = sbrk(-4096);
> >     r = sbrk(4096);
> >
> > and the memory pointed to by `r' is not zeroed.  I just got through
> reading
> > the
> > man page for `brk' and `sbrk' and neither one specifies that newly
> allocated
> > memory is zeroed and therefore I interpret this issue as undefined
> behavior.
> > Any program that depends upon the contents of newly allocated memory is
> > broken.  In fact, if you compile the test program, `d.c', for IA64 and run
> > it it
> > fails.  Also, if you compile the test program for IA32 and use 1K
> allocation
> > blocks
> > the program fails on an IA32 machine also.
> >
> > Someone correct me if I'm wrong about this.
> >
> > PS:  I know that `calloc' is defined to zero out the allocated memory but
> > from
> > what I can tell it does this by explicitly calling `memset'.  I'm trying
> to
> > verify this
> > but I haven't found the `calloc' code in the `glibc' tree yet.  (The
> `glibc'
> > tree always
> > confuses me, if anyone can tell me exactly where to find the `calloc' code
> > I'd
> > appreciate it :-)
> > --
> > Don Dugger
> > n0ano@indstorage.com
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "David Mosberger" <davidm@hpl.hp.com>
> > To: <n0ano@indstorage.com>
> > Cc: "Hideki Yamamoto" <hideki@hpc.bs1.fc.nec.co.jp>;
> > <linux-ia64@linuxia64.org>
> > Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 4:58 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Linux-ia64] Pagesize is different between IA32 and IA64
> >
> >
> > > But I think the page size problem with brk() is real and can be fixed
> > > quite easily.  If I understood correctly, the problem is that doing
> > > something along the lines of:
> > >
> > > x = ALIGN_TO_4K(sbrk(8192));
> > > memset(x, 0xff, 4096);
> > > brk(x);
> > > brk(x+4096);
> > >
> > > might preserve the contents of the page at X on under the ia32
> > > subsystem of ia64 when in fact it should be cleared to zero.
> > >
> > > Would you be able/interested into looking into this?
> > >
> > > --david
> > >
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-IA64 mailing list
> Linux-IA64@linuxia64.org
> http://lists.linuxia64.org/lists/listinfo/linux-ia64
>