X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:message-id:date:from:reply-to:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=kufRRnjgq0zmR+WQ cFxn4VCQMYVrRbD8+zjOuJdPWoTbbOmKs+Jix8oTxQnVi4oi+mnNbZeD/QzcBEnQ ldqOMurQ6VT876faajY0xRGBZ/1YT7Yi8myWr4adb91xsrFogn/1DBDPF7mPna9I fMHhqwkBvfLZ5I3rORzj6lK2sug= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:message-id:date:from:reply-to:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=8lXAH44SzmVsb1kJTJrRki RbIvY=; b=uAXkKl8+8s/DzIUTzXO4w5CBWmQ1cvFd6vJlu65AnRizkWgIYRWrOe rkj2QQxAUVSQlMjf4rMDCnRxf9hXNru6KzyViV0X8+nRIq4ppWgwiyR093ZLWuEF /ER+0FKwbHsjx/jGGZLo+5BmayjBeCWKMi6tAFuFPdkGK8tpshL2U= Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: vms173023pub.verizon.net Message-id: <52EAB3B9.4030505@cygwin.com> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 15:19:05 -0500 From: "Larry Hall (Cygwin)" Reply-to: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: second call to mmap() results in error References: <20140129181250 DOT GW2821 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <52E95786 DOT 8050606 AT gmail DOT com> <20140130095822 DOT GY2821 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <001801cf1db6$66c47c40$344d74c0$@lbmsys.com> <20140130124558 DOT GA2821 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <003801cf1dbd$fc3ffc70$f4bff550$@lbmsys.com> <20140130170142 DOT GD2821 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <5F8AAC04F9616747BC4CC0E803D5907D0C4763CC AT MLBXv04 DOT nih DOT gov> <52EA9A53 DOT 2050203 AT cygwin DOT com> <5F8AAC04F9616747BC4CC0E803D5907D0C4764C5 AT MLBXv04 DOT nih DOT gov> <20140130183956 DOT GA3573 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <5F8AAC04F9616747BC4CC0E803D5907D0C4764ED AT MLBXv04 DOT nih DOT gov> <52EA9EA2 DOT 5030202 AT cygwin DOT com> <5F8AAC04F9616747BC4CC0E803D5907D0C476528 AT MLBXv04 DOT nih DOT gov> <52EAA171 DOT 406 AT cygwin DOT com> <5F8AAC04F9616747BC4CC0E803D5907D0C4765D8 AT MLBXv04 DOT nih DOT gov> <52EAA848 DOT 7070808 AT cygwin DOT com> <5F8AAC04F9616747BC4CC0E803D5907D0C477869 AT MLBXv04 DOT nih DOT gov> In-reply-to: <5F8AAC04F9616747BC4CC0E803D5907D0C477869@MLBXv04.nih.gov> Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit On 1/30/2014 2:46 PM, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] wrote: > OP privately wrote: > >> The problem is also fixed by correct type-casting in the calls to mmap() ... >> >> mmap1 = mmap(NULL, (size_t) 524304, PROT_WRITE | PROT_READ, MAP_SHARED, >> shm_fd1, 0); >> >> The address returned from the call to mmap() -- with or without the >> ftruncate() -- was bad without the (size_t) specification. > > (note "with or without ftruncate()") > > And I ask again (last time, I promise), how on Earth adding to > the code below would make the code suddenly working? (Like I said before, > that code worked for me, with -Wall showing nothing, from the very beginning.) OK, I didn't realize you were asking Steve specifically, on list, to clarify a statement he made to you in a private message. And now that I recognize which code you've been thinking about when you've been asking questions throughout this thread, I can only tell you the behavior I see with it, which doesn't match yours if I understand correctly what you've been seeing. That said, it really doesn't matter what I see if you want to know more details specifically from Steve. Given that, I'll bow out of this thread. -- Larry _____________________________________________________________________ A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email? -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple