From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P0woY-0000CI-Td for ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 29 Sep 2010 13:35:18 +0000 Received: from eu1sys200aog102.obsmtp.com ([207.126.144.113]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with smtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) id 1P0woU-0000fG-Gn for ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 29 Sep 2010 13:35:18 +0000 Received: from zeta.dmz-us.st.com (ns4.st.com [167.4.80.115]) by beta.dmz-us.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id CCFD211E for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2010 13:31:40 +0000 (GMT) Received: from Webmail-eu.st.com (safex1hubcas3.st.com [10.75.90.18]) by zeta.dmz-us.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id 777AF526 for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2010 13:34:56 +0000 (GMT) From: Carmelo AMOROSO Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 15:34:40 +0200 Message-ID: <4CA34070.9070505@st.com> References: <4CA09D4D.6050708@st.com> In-Reply-To: <4CA09D4D.6050708@st.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [LTP] ltp_clone alignment issues. List-Id: Linux Test Project General Discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-list-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net To: "ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 9/27/2010 3:34 PM, Carmelo AMOROSO wrote: > Folks, > I want to reopen an old discussion on ltp_clone and stack alignment > issue (see > http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_name=4B421480.1040400%40petalogix.com). > Indeed recently a commit has partially fixed a problem on ARM > (0056e395170eb8fc3ffbb22d7bd364fe47c2013e), but I think this should be > extended to all archs that have stack that grows downwards. > > Indeed, as Jiri replied in that old thread, the value passed to clone as > child stack should be never accessed, because it is the topmost address > of the memory allocated for the child process (it's the previous stack > pointer). > > So, in archs that do not like unaligned stack, using (stack - size - 1 ) > will cause the process to be killed by a SIGBUS, on other archs, we are > just wasting one byte of the malloc-ed stack. > > On my SH4 arch, the stack must be 4byte aligned (as in ARM). > > Please, find attached a patch against master branch > > Best regards, > Carmelo Hi, any feedback on this ? Cheers, Carmelo -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkyjQHAACgkQoRq/3BrK1s9mRQCfYVc9ePJRwf5hd6NRvjtjHsLO sxYAoMj83bu0I4cvU+iEUpH4iXGuBJTD =s2GZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Start uncovering the many advantages of virtual appliances and start using them to simplify application deployment and accelerate your shift to cloud computing. http://p.sf.net/sfu/novell-sfdev2dev _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list