From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=UJ3I=CC=gmail.com=marco.atzeri@sourceware.org>
Received: from mail-yb1-xb34.google.com (mail-yb1-xb34.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b34])
	by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DD66C3858C53
	for <cygwin@cygwin.com>; Wed, 14 Jun 2023 14:48:52 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org DD66C3858C53
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com
Received: by mail-yb1-xb34.google.com with SMTP id 3f1490d57ef6-bd5f59fb71dso770165276.3
        for <cygwin@cygwin.com>; Wed, 14 Jun 2023 07:48:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1686754132; x=1689346132;
        h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from
         :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date
         :message-id:reply-to;
        bh=9GhAIk7zpqRda7gpsZKTVJ1CFsIYD8yu08g4f48TeNU=;
        b=Bzk1ETPa6yIBAYnWRDaSBBZX9SxyuCSfSMEoht1Ko7xFo8rOj2U+43GiHrF97La6D8
         2qRmBa2zZVYqg9RUMNQF7xIJWu6Q3H22vWO0E6mbaXyeV03kEHmDzg2lrUufqx3j0Wqe
         fv0xnNKXmNSQskPy0DuGO/KO7QImBLJ3Kip5J9tgz68VRI+6q2LdOdpJ8NkSKqrXcM2l
         /UzirpltrUK6KqjHkggnjMJEvkpJf91UiuaE/yDNUEiQ59SJjdioJLwaGxY+kIj+N9rr
         sSuNDe0wwDcOevJYiSl2rrdD5+k5bNGeWsw6iO8GdFn4qx+6MkWjKYiwe1rW2LgWHqUk
         WCWg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1686754132; x=1689346132;
        h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from
         :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc
         :subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
        bh=9GhAIk7zpqRda7gpsZKTVJ1CFsIYD8yu08g4f48TeNU=;
        b=iYcWm1CTd0J+RSmaJmRxkXVO46ahQkkspFTYMj8wDFvVyr3bBHRZ1lT4Pxh4YAX7n2
         Xbc9WSWOzifncdDFyPIgew9UlE+po1Wm6OBic9H19EyYNAAfg3/L4+L/bAjlHfXLt99J
         8sVtOJC5DN46ImQHR+a9p9dgM8azlJjBn3s72FwG5/L2OZV+2bJeZOxjk6KZIc+OIc6M
         ceaZud6JatKD4O7Aw/WOaf+w2HJ8UZvbyuNLgnw7eyMbN2qDfAbD+pKTwc+hzF7TFXov
         WRVWQOvEqa+dH3HlsKXXW4vi8jYkhQav9YuNuRTqwVMXsJp+7rkJU+UYtclcdhJXRPB9
         CHpw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDzjaU8Q0JCAIT087roIqwmmJUEyk5lW1jqVhierdK/t+Ef0eFly
	8UsPR0izTqw2Mo2rhhGQYYR9gXNNNQKm59SYoDU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ4bs5urZB51+yYQo54eQAqAfoB1GMhVcPRDf4JDrcGfIKvoWZQMYk0jEvSs47BiT9ApmcqnaJMX4cVL0LEchiI=
X-Received: by 2002:a0d:cbc4:0:b0:55a:5ce4:aff2 with SMTP id
 n187-20020a0dcbc4000000b0055a5ce4aff2mr1761455ywd.39.1686754132227; Wed, 14
 Jun 2023 07:48:52 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <b7a37aeabe4ce0df6b33f55088a28150@tiscali.it>
In-Reply-To: <b7a37aeabe4ce0df6b33f55088a28150@tiscali.it>
From: marco atzeri <marco.atzeri@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2023 16:48:41 +0200
Message-ID: <CAB8Xom8c6V5cc-54a5tjxxGaR-CO4nTCs23yo3KkUPWTJrO8sg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: fork bug in cygheap
To: paolo.zambotti@tiscali.it
Cc: cygwin@cygwin.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>

On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 2:20=E2=80=AFPM Paolo via Cygwin <cygwin@cygwin.com=
> wrote:
>
>   Hi all,
>
> I just found a bug (I think) in cygheap_fixup_in_child
> function (cygheap.cc).
> the effect is that, sometimes a command from a
> script ends with the following error message
>
> 0 [main] openssl (17784)
> child_copy: cygheap read copy failed, 0x0..0x8003D8538, done 0, windows
> pid 17784, Win32 error 299
>
> Digging a little bit in the code I found
> that commit_size in cygheap_fixup_in_child is wrongly calculated if the
> condition (child_proc_info->cygheap_max > (void *)
> CYGHEAP_STORAGE_INITIAL) is met.
>
> Currently, in that case, its value is
> evaluated as
>
> commit_size =3D allocsize
> (child_proc_info->cygheap_max);
>
> but I think this is wrong and it should
> be
>
> commit_size =3D allocsize (child_proc_info->cygheap_max) -
> CYGHEAP_STORAGE_LOW;
>
> The wrong value avoids the successful execution of
> the following second VirtualAlloc and the the error in child_copy
> function.
>
> I tried to recompile the cygwin dll with the above change and
> indeed the error disappears.
>
> I'm I correct?
> Paolo.
>

it looks like
https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin-developers/2023-April/012620.html