From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Reply-To: From: "Joakim Tjernlund" To: "'Peter Bergner'" , "'Franz Sirl'" Cc: Subject: Re: TASK_UNMAPPED_BASE Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 09:57:41 +0100 Message-ID: <001301c3ebc6$1d9f0a80$0a01a8c0@LUMENTIS02> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" In-Reply-To: <1075905440.2895.23.camel@otta.rchland.ibm.com> Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: > On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 09:22, Franz Sirl wrote: > > At 14:05 03.02.2004, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > >> I changed TASK_UNMAPPED_BASE to well under 0x01fffffc and it worked > >> as well. > >> > >> My question: Why is TASK_UNMAPPED_BASE=0x30000000 and would > >> changing it to something less, say 0x00100000 be a problem? > > > > Hmm, might work, but it can also break in subtle ways, cause the > > shared lib loading algorithm makes a few assumptions about the used > > address ranges IIRC. But I don't see any use for it if you consider > > what I said above. > > I've seen problems with HPC apps/benchmarks with huge bss's that fail > to run because TASK_UNMAPED_BASE is set too low. Too low, does that mean TASK_UNMAPED_BASE < 0x00100000 will fail with huge bss's as well? Or will it just fail for 0x30000000 => TASK_UNMAPED_BASE <= 0x10000000? To me it seems like it is a good idea to change(at least in 2.6 where the bugs you mentioned has been fixed) TASK_UNMAPED_BASE to 0x00100000(or lower). Is there a way I can tell glibc to load it's libs around TASK_UNMAPED_BASE? Currently only ld.so follows TASK_UNMAPED_BASE, the other libs always loads at 0x0fxxxxxx. Glibc/ld.so version is 2.2.3 Jocke ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/