From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: TASK_UNMAPPED_BASE From: Peter Bergner To: joakim.tjernlund@lumentis.se Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org In-Reply-To: <001301c3ebc6$1d9f0a80$0a01a8c0@LUMENTIS02> References: <001301c3ebc6$1d9f0a80$0a01a8c0@LUMENTIS02> Content-Type: text/plain; charset= Message-Id: <1075998857.2843.14.camel@otta.rchland.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2004 10:34:18 -0600 Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: On Thu, 2004-02-05 at 02:57, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > 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). The problem with a TASK_UNMAPPED_BASE that was "too low" was referring to the bug where we always loaded ld.so at TASK_UNMAPPED_BASE even though that adress was in the middle of the bss. Now that has been fixed, "too low" isn't a concern anymore. However, I'm not sure moving the TASK_UNMAPPED_BASE below the text section will work. It's used for more than just loading shared libs. Anonymous mmap areas and the heap are all located relative to it. > 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 IIRC, only ppc32 loads it's libs this way. For example, ppc64 loads all its libs above TASK_UNMAPPED_BASE. Hälsningar, Peter ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/