From: "Bao C. Ha" <baoha@sensoria.com>
To: "'Benjamin LaHaise'" <bcrl@redhat.com>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: Different old_mmap behavior between 2.4.5 and 2.4.8
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:31:22 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <02b701c13aef$f59f0a00$456c020a@SENSORIA> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20010910214946.A16760@redhat.com>
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 06:30:55PM -0700, Bao C. Ha wrote:
> > Is this supposed to be the correct behavior? What changes
> > make the newer kernels to return different pointers? We
> > are running on the sh4 architecture but I think these calls
> > come from malloc() which should be arch-independent.
>
> The result from earlier kernels is wrong. If your code
> requires that the same address is returned as was specified
> then you need to pass in the MAP_FIXED flag.
Unfortunately, it is the linuxthreads code that is broken
on the sh4 platform. It seems that the pointers are moved
due to cache aliasing. I am trying to raise awareness that
this is breaking pthreads applications on sh4-linux.
Following is the relevant segment of linuxthreads that is
broken:
In function pthread_allocate_stack(), file manager.c:
.......
# ifdef _STACK_GROWS_DOWN
new_thread = default_new_thread;
new_thread_bottom = (char *) (new_thread + 1) - stacksize;
map_addr = new_thread_bottom - guardsize;
res_addr = mmap(map_addr, stacksize + guardsize,
PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE | PROT_EXEC,
MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0);
if (res_addr != map_addr)
{
/* Bad luck, this segment is already mapped. */
if (res_addr != MAP_FAILED)
munmap (res_addr, stacksize + guardsize);
return -1;
}
.......
We resort to patching the MAP_FIXED back to linuxthreads
until we get a resolution on this problem.
Thanks.
Bao
prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-09-11 18:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-09-11 1:30 Different old_mmap behavior between 2.4.5 and 2.4.8 Bao C. Ha
2001-09-11 1:49 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2001-09-11 18:31 ` Bao C. Ha [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='02b701c13aef$f59f0a00$456c020a@SENSORIA' \
--to=baoha@sensoria.com \
--cc=bcrl@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox