From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28257 invoked by alias); 14 Mar 2015 17:56:10 -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 28247 invoked by uid 89); 14 Mar 2015 17:56:10 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Sat, 14 Mar 2015 17:56:09 +0000 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t2EHu5D5007114 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sat, 14 Mar 2015 13:56:06 -0400 Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (ovpn-116-63.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.63]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t2EHu4Zl030111 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 14 Mar 2015 13:56:05 -0400 Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t2EHu2JU022424; Sat, 14 Mar 2015 18:56:03 +0100 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.14.9/8.14.9/Submit) id t2EHu16D022423; Sat, 14 Mar 2015 18:56:01 +0100 Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 17:56:00 -0000 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Mike Stump Cc: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer , Alan Modra , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Fix for PRs 36043, 58744 and 65408 Message-ID: <20150314175601.GM1746@tucnak.redhat.com> Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <20150314130238.GD16488@bubble.grove.modra.org> <6E83247A-F634-43AA-A3F1-249F99AE7719@gmail.com> <277E04CB-8E5D-4F1D-BECA-8A97BDD43DF7@comcast.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <277E04CB-8E5D-4F1D-BECA-8A97BDD43DF7@comcast.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-03/txt/msg00782.txt.bz2 On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 10:51:28AM -0700, Mike Stump wrote: > On Mar 14, 2015, at 6:58 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: > > On March 14, 2015 2:02:38 PM GMT+01:00, 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? > > > > Well since sbrk was marked LEGACY in SUSv2 and was removed in SUSv3 (and still is in 1003.1-2008) I'm not sure it is wise to use it in new code.. Using it will bite testing on legacy-free setups, fwiw. > > newlib doesn’t have mmap. Indeed, some machines will never have mmap. newlib has sbrk. Still, I think it is preferrable to test with mmap... Jakub