From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=UbFi=CI=suse.de=schwab@sourceware.org>
Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.220.28])
	by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8786C3858D1E;
	Tue, 20 Jun 2023 08:21:43 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 8786C3858D1E
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.de
Received: from relay2.suse.de (relay2.suse.de [149.44.160.134])
	by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id A13DC218DF;
	Tue, 20 Jun 2023 08:21:42 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa;
	t=1687249302; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:
	 mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type:
	 in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references;
	bh=F8d3+2Ax+p7cE0hxnpkVYF1huyRwdFBt3u6qYnYCVY0=;
	b=NZobhpcnnmbdp0EbJPpVZnuTaCRcp+bgSJGpA0dTzjuCRZ3lrxslc4Hm7+DHAjVmP7bbj3
	inQN2fXk3akDWZIxcHKGW5NN5nQr5owrsA4Y5x4cD3pI8py84bIQH0x25Pk9BO/Tj0RDzD
	/hc2b2/QheB3VoCMTIKFAKfzp2fB4Uk=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de;
	s=susede2_ed25519; t=1687249302;
	h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:
	 mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type:
	 in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references;
	bh=F8d3+2Ax+p7cE0hxnpkVYF1huyRwdFBt3u6qYnYCVY0=;
	b=8/kMoA4CdU9RI7PZpOhRTztOu//ueeFGoZPDqskv/eZwxVRmIPwr8czZJIV87QXRF9OVbD
	ChNEkrEpMWXMqiAw==
Received: from hawking.suse.de (unknown [10.168.4.11])
	by relay2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D6032C141;
	Tue, 20 Jun 2023 08:21:42 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by hawking.suse.de (Postfix, from userid 17005)
	id 75D994AAD73; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 10:21:42 +0200 (CEST)
From: Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>
To: Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Cc: Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz>,  Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>,
  Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com>,  libstdc++ <libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [libstdc++] Improve M_check_len
In-Reply-To: <ZJFeXgeoYbamluUK@tucnak> (Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches's
	message of "Tue, 20 Jun 2023 10:07:58 +0200")
References: <ZI9MmdQ+OMehcdeg@kam.mff.cuni.cz>
	<CACb0b4kgHajswPwumWtjLeXOMt75tt0jJhmb1-JZ4wzrfXvB4A@mail.gmail.com>
	<ZJA2gJzMkigiwqkZ@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <ZJA5/fuVUNpkc3ms@tucnak>
	<CACb0b4nt=mNKYS7+Fwnrf0Kq4umLu0M7Z-SotzCbx7=oEs021g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACb0b4ksDYihf--ZXr21RS4eDVAAsH4i7wRvYT2BA6XN=ZTznQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<ZJFaQbSqlOuq2hNa@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <ZJFeXgeoYbamluUK@tucnak>
X-Yow: YOW!!
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 10:21:42 +0200
Message-ID: <mvmwmzy1r3d.fsf@suse.de>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>

On Jun 20 2023, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:

> Is it safe even on 64bit targets?  I mean, doesn't say PowerPC already allow
> full 64-bit virtual address space?  The assumption that one can't have
> more than half of virtual address space allocations is true right now at
> least on x86-64, aarch64 and others, but isn't that something that can
> change with newer versions of CPUs without the need to recompile
> applications (add another level or two of page tables)?

At least s390 can allocate more than half the address space.  That
triggered a failure in gawk.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE  1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7
"And now for something completely different."