From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id B21303857829; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 20:31:42 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org B21303857829 From: "goldstein.w.n at gmail dot com" To: glibc-bugs@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug libc/28572] Misaligned accesses in test-memcpy and test-mempcpy on hppa Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2021 20:31:42 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: glibc X-Bugzilla-Component: libc X-Bugzilla-Version: unspecified X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: goldstein.w.n at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at sourceware dot org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: glibc-bugs@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Glibc-bugs mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2021 20:31:42 -0000 https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D28572 --- Comment #16 from Noah Goldstein --- (In reply to Adhemerval Zanella from comment #12) > The misaligned access come from string/test-memcpy-support.h, which uses = the > input alignment to create 'uint32_t*' pointers. This is the issue we sho= uld > fix for this bug report, but I don't think the patch proposed is the best > approach. I think the following should work, but I did not tested on mach= ine > that does not support unaligned access: >=20 > diff --git a/string/test-memcpy-support.h b/string/test-memcpy-support.h > index 419158a420..69c983957f 100644 > --- a/string/test-memcpy-support.h > +++ b/string/test-memcpy-support.h > @@ -141,7 +141,7 @@ do_test1 (size_t align1, size_t align2, size_t size) > for (repeats =3D 0; repeats < 2; repeats++) > { > for (i =3D 0; i < array_size; i++) > - src[i] =3D (uint32_t)i; > + memcpy (&src[i], & (uint32_t){i}, sizeof (uint32_t)); > FOR_EACH_IMPL (impl, 0) > { > memset (dest, -1, size); > @@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ do_test1 (size_t align1, size_t align2, size_t size) > if (memcmp (src, dest, size)) > { > for (i =3D 0; i < array_size; i++) > - if (dest[i] !=3D src[i]) > + if (memcmp (&dest[i], &src[i], sizeof (uint32_t)) !=3D 0) > { > error (0, 0, > "Wrong result in function %s dst \"%p\" src \"%= p\" > " >=20 >=20 > For the test-memcpy taking too much time, I think we should track it on > another bug. Fair enough. I had misread the bug-report and thought it was about execution time in general. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=