Mail Archives: cygwin/2005/11/26/17:10:54
René Berber, le Sat 26 Nov 2005 15:19:06 -0600, a écrit :
> Samuel Thibault wrote:
> [snip]
> > This seems odd. In the cygwin case, pagesize() would not be sufficient ??
>
> No, in windows there is a requirement that mmap uses memory aligned to 64k (the
> infamous granularity).
Then the result of pagesize() is not sufficiently big: POSIX says that
mmap() can return EINVAL if « the address [...] is not a multiple of
the page size, or is considered invalid by the implementation ». Well,
we could consider non-16-pages-alignment as `considered invalid', but I
guess this expression was meant as `not in a mmap()-able area'.
> > And anyway, it should rather be
> > data2 = (char *) malloc (2 * 16 * pagesize);
> > Not only 16 (since it is further 16*pagesize -aligned).
>
> It's enough to allocate 16 x pagesize to use one page for mmap-ing (like Corinna
> said in one message 15/16 pages will not be aligned -- but one will). If you
> see the intermediate results I printed, data2 is re-aligned to 64k correctly.
Ah oops, didn't pay attention that the mmap was page-sized. 16 pages
are still not enough: if malloc() returns 0x0001 for instance, you'll
round up that to 16*pagesize, which is out the allocated area. 17 pages
are necessary.
BTW, I don't understand why using so complicated code:
p += (align - ((long) p & (align-1))) & (align-1)
Isn't
p = ((long) p + (align-1)) & (align-1)
both faster (tested) and more readable ?
Regards,
Samuel
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -