This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: i370 port - music/sp - possible generic gcc problem


On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Paul Edwards <mutazilah@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Anyway, I tracked down the particular malloc() which gave changed
>>> behaviour depending on whether the malloc() did a memory initialization
>>> to NULs or not.
>
>> Well, GC hands out non-zeroed memory - the callers are responsible
>> for initializing it. ?So the fix below is not a fix but papering over an
>> issue elswhere.
>
> Hi Richard.
>
> If GC does that, then how come there is all this effort to do
> mmap testing to see if it has the facility to zero memory, and

I can't see what you are refering to.

> why is the surrounding code (in GCC 4.4's alloc_page())
> calling XCNEWVEC instead of XNEWVEC?

That's the page table entries, not the data itself.

There wouldn't be the need for ggc_alloc_cleared if ggc_alloc
would already zero pages.

Richard.

> Thanks. ?Paul.
>
>


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]