From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13931 invoked by alias); 27 Sep 2007 00:21:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 13918 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Sep 2007 00:21:12 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rwcrmhc12.comcast.net (HELO rwcrmhc12.comcast.net) (216.148.227.152) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Sep 2007 00:21:11 +0000 Received: from rickmce (c-68-55-175-129.hsd1.md.comcast.net[68.55.175.129]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc12) with SMTP id <20070927002108m1200h9gipe>; Thu, 27 Sep 2007 00:21:09 +0000 From: "Rick Davis" To: "'Andrew Lunn'" Cc: "'Ecos-Discuss'" References: <006a01c7f63e$3d31d630$b7958290$@net> <20070913205849.GC16874@lunn.ch> In-Reply-To: <20070913205849.GC16874@lunn.ch> Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 00:21:00 -0000 Message-ID: <00a701c8009c$82b1d5d0$88158170$@net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Content-Language: en-us Mailing-List: contact ecos-discuss-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-discuss-owner@ecos.sourceware.org Subject: RE: [ECOS] Doug Lea's malloc X-SW-Source: 2007-09/txt/msg00137.txt.bz2 Andrew, Sorry it took so long to get back. Here is the dump I get when calling setvbuf (stdout, NULL, _IONBUF, 0); ASSERT FAIL: <5>dlmalloc.cxx[815]void Cyg_Mempool_dlmalloc_Implementation::do_check_inuse_chunk() ((((mchunkptr)(((char*)(p))+((p)->size & ~0x1)))->size) & 0x1) ASSERT FAIL: dlmalloc.cxx [ 815] void Cyg_Mempool_dlmalloc_Implementation::do_check_inuse_chunk() ((((mchunkptr)(((char*)(p))+((p)->size & ~0x1)))->size) & 0x1) Rick -----Original Message----- From: Andrew Lunn [mailto:andrew@lunn.ch] Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 4:59 PM To: Rick Davis Cc: Ecos-Discuss Subject: Re: [ECOS] dOUG lEE'S MALLOC On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 03:42:36PM -0400, Rick Davis wrote: > I am porting to a new Power-PC platform that has 256M of DDR on it. I am > using the latest snapshot (today as a matter of fact). If I call setvbuf > (stdout, NULL, _IONBF, 0), Doug's code complains throwing some sort of size > assertion. If I don't call setvbuf but call show_memory, that complains > about other issues. If I use the simple malloc routines instead, everything > works fine. Is there a memory size issue? Is something not being called in > the right order during initialization? Do you have a simple test case? I just tried running the synthetic target which a big heap. All the malloc tests pass. eg malloc4 produces: INFO: INFO: INFO: INFO: INFO: INFO: INFO: INFO: INFO: INFO: INFO: INFO: INFO: INFO: INFO: INFO: INFO: INFO: INFO: INFO: INFO: INFO: INFO: PASS: EXIT: Here the heap is around 263Mbytes. What exactly are the assertion failures you are getting? Andrew -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss