From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17451 invoked by alias); 14 Mar 2015 13:55:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 17436 invoked by uid 89); 14 Mar 2015 13:55:40 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=0.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,KAM_FROM_URIBL_PCCC,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-pd0-f177.google.com Received: from mail-pd0-f177.google.com (HELO mail-pd0-f177.google.com) (209.85.192.177) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Sat, 14 Mar 2015 13:55:39 +0000 Received: by pdbcz9 with SMTP id cz9so12720742pdb.3 for ; Sat, 14 Mar 2015 06:55:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.70.90.161 with SMTP id bx1mr40978978pdb.146.1426341337435; Sat, 14 Mar 2015 06:55:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bubble.grove.modra.org (CPE-58-160-155-134.oycza5.sa.bigpond.net.au. [58.160.155.134]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id mi9sm8466364pab.3.2015.03.14.06.55.36 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 14 Mar 2015 06:55:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by bubble.grove.modra.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E6C28EA0139; Sun, 15 Mar 2015 00:25:31 +1030 (ACDT) Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 13:55:00 -0000 From: Alan Modra To: "H.J. Lu" Cc: GCC Patches Subject: Re: Fix for PRs 36043, 58744 and 65408 Message-ID: <20150314135531.GE16488@bubble.grove.modra.org> Mail-Followup-To: "H.J. Lu" , GCC Patches References: <20150314130238.GD16488@bubble.grove.modra.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-03/txt/msg00776.txt.bz2 On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 06:14:40AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 6:02 AM, Alan Modra wrote: > > I'll also throw together a testcase or three. For execute tests I'm > > thinking of using sbrk to locate an odd sized struct such that access > > past the end segfaults, rather than mmap/munmap as was done in the > > pr36043 testcase. Does that sound reasonable? > > Can you add a testcase in > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36043 I was thinking that mmap/munmap is less portable than sbrk. Hmm, a grep over the testsuite says mmap is already used and do-do run { target mmap } is available. OK, I'm happy to jump that way too. -- Alan Modra Australia Development Lab, IBM