[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140331074421.GA30395@example.net>
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 09:44:21 +0200
From: u-igbb@...ey.se
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Proposed approach for malloc to deal with failing brk
Hello Rich,
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 12:32:48AM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> > Perhaps the best part is that this solution can be implemented in just
> > a few lines of code.
>
> And here's the patch. Please test and let me know if this works.
Extremely appreciated (and a nice approach indeed, as far as I can see).
Now rebuilding a bunch of programs (including the gcc compiler itself)
with a gcc which uses the patched musl and so far it seems to work.
I guess this exercises malloc quite a bit.
(Under the gcc stages rebuilding, the loader is used implicitly and
presumably the heap exhaustion is not triggered, this confirms that the
patch did not damage the brk mode of operation. The compiler seems otherwise
to be capable of building everything I throw at it, while being run via the
standalone loder, which previously failed due to "no memory")
You saved my day, thanks Rich.
Rune
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
