From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24220 invoked by alias); 14 Mar 2015 17:52:27 -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 24208 invoked by uid 89); 14 Mar 2015 17:52:26 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: resqmta-po-09v.sys.comcast.net Received: from resqmta-po-09v.sys.comcast.net (HELO resqmta-po-09v.sys.comcast.net) (96.114.154.168) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Sat, 14 Mar 2015 17:52:26 +0000 Received: from resomta-po-17v.sys.comcast.net ([96.114.154.241]) by resqmta-po-09v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id 3VsB1q0015Clt1L01VsPU7; Sat, 14 Mar 2015 17:52:23 +0000 Received: from [IPv6:2001:558:6045:a4:40c6:7199:cd03:b02d] ([IPv6:2001:558:6045:a4:40c6:7199:cd03:b02d]) by resomta-po-17v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id 3VsM1q0082ztT3H01VsNrM; Sat, 14 Mar 2015 17:52:23 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) Subject: Re: Fix for PRs 36043, 58744 and 65408 From: Mike Stump In-Reply-To: <6E83247A-F634-43AA-A3F1-249F99AE7719@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 17:52:00 -0000 Cc: Alan Modra , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <277E04CB-8E5D-4F1D-BECA-8A97BDD43DF7@comcast.net> References: <20150314130238.GD16488@bubble.grove.modra.org> <6E83247A-F634-43AA-A3F1-249F99AE7719@gmail.com> To: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-03/txt/msg00781.txt.bz2 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 wro= te: >=20 >> 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? >=20 > 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.. Us= ing it will bite testing on legacy-free setups, fwiw. newlib doesn=92t have mmap. Indeed, some machines will never have mmap. n= ewlib has sbrk.