public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "danielmicay at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/67999] Wrong optimization of pointer comparisons
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 08:41:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-67999-4-1seuQkmMN0@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-67999-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67999

--- Comment #9 from Daniel Micay <danielmicay at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Florian Weimer from comment #8)
> (In reply to Alexander Cherepanov from comment #4)
> 
> > Am I right that the C standards do not allow for such a limitation (and
> > hence this should not be reported to glibc as a bug) and gcc is not
> > standards-compliant in this regard? Or I'm missing something?
> 
> The standard explicitly acknowledges the possibility of arrays that have
> more than PTRDIFF_MAX elements (it says that the difference of two pointers
> within the same array is not necessarily representable in ptrdiff_t).
> 
> I'm hesitant to put in artificial limits into glibc because in the mast,
> there was significant demand for huge mappings in 32-bit programs (to the
> degree that Red Hat even shipped special kernels for this purpose).

I don't think there's much of a use case for allocating a single >2G allocation
in a 3G or 4G address space. It has a high chance of failure simply due to
virtual memory fragmentation, especially since the kernel's mmap allocation
algorithm is so naive (keeps going downwards and ignores holes until it runs
out, rather than using first-best-fit).

Was the demand for a larger address space or was it really for the ability to
allocate all that memory in one go?


  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-10-19  8:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <bug-67999-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2015-10-17  8:03 ` glisse at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-10-17  8:14 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-10-17  8:35 ` schwab@linux-m68k.org
2015-10-17 12:52 ` ch3root at openwall dot com
2015-10-19  2:30 ` danielmicay at gmail dot com
2015-10-19  5:36 ` bugdal at aerifal dot cx
2015-10-19  8:17 ` fw at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-10-19  8:26 ` fw at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-10-19  8:41 ` danielmicay at gmail dot com [this message]
2015-10-19  8:47 ` danielmicay at gmail dot com
2015-10-19  9:05 ` fw at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-10-19  9:09 ` fw at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-10-19  9:12 ` danielmicay at gmail dot com
2015-10-19  9:26 ` danielmicay at gmail dot com
2015-10-19  9:55 ` danielmicay at gmail dot com
2015-10-19  9:56 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-10-19 10:12 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-10-21  2:09 ` ch3root at openwall dot com
2015-10-21  2:18 ` ch3root at openwall dot com
2015-10-21  3:21 ` danielmicay at gmail dot com
2015-10-28  0:12 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com
2015-10-28  0:20 ` bugdal at aerifal dot cx
2015-10-28  2:29 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com
2015-10-28 18:26 ` ch3root at openwall dot com

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=bug-67999-4-1seuQkmMN0@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.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;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).