Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030216141103.02982708@pop3.cris.com>
X-Sender: rrschulz AT pop3 DOT cris DOT com
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 14:22:38 -0800
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From: Randall R Schulz <rrschulz AT cris DOT com>
Subject: RE:size limit for static arrays in cygwin/gcc
In-Reply-To: <20030216195610.12201.qmail@web21404.mail.yahoo.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

Danny,

A couple of months ago, someone reported on how local (stack) 
allocations larger than a certain threshold were allocated on the heap. 
In fact, you, Danny, contributed materially to that thread: Subject 
"Strange behaviour of gcc" starting with a posting by 
fabrizio_ge-wolit AT tiscali DOT it on Dec. 24, 2002.

In that case Fabrizio wanted to avoid the dependence that heap 
allocation created on the runtime or C library. That was C/C++ code and 
I don't know where this allocation strategy is implemented--i.e., 
whether it's in a language-specific front-end or a language-independent 
back-end of GCC (and here we should emphasise the official name: the 
GNU Compiler Collection, not the GNU C Compiler as many believe it to mean).

You also supplied this tidbit:

>To disable stack probing, add this switch  -mno-stack-arg-probe.


Just something to keep in mind.

Randall Schulz


At 11:56 2003-02-16, Danny Smith wrote:

>"Charles D. Russell" <worwor at bellsouth dot net> wrote:
>
> >    Meanwhile, I am trying to find an equivalent problem in C so 
> that it will
> > get more attention.  Unfortunately, I don't know much C.  The subsequent
> > program fails with a segmentation violation if one tries to allocate more
> > than a few Mb of memory on either my old or my new 
> system.  Why?  What limit
> > am I bumping into?
>
>By default stack reserve is set to 2MB by ld.exe.  Try setting stack 
>reserve higher, eg,
>     -Wl,--stack=0x2000000
>will get you 32MB stack reserve
>
>Danny


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/