Message-ID: <00fa01c30f0a$a0d4dc20$0600000a@broadpark.no> From: "Gisle Vanem" To: References: <3EAFA264 DOT 18185C7B AT yahoo DOT com> Subject: Re: uclock again Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 13:21:21 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com "CBFalconer" said: > IF you are referring to nmalloc, it always allocates in multiples > of 8, and any such overrun will write into the prv field. The > result will immediately be detected by malloc_verify if the > stack_length above is a multiple of 8 or less than 4 smaller. In > many cases it should also be eventually caught by routine > operation (i.e. no malldbg/malloc_verify in use) of nmalloc with > the message "memory fouled" to stderr and a SIGABRT. But not before the next malloc/free operation if guess. That doesn't me when the rmcb-stub of the real-mode callback messes up. Is there an interrupt safe function I can use to test this with? --gv