I don't understand what you are saying. If you're on a recent version of seL4
then that commit should definitely be there, as it's a merge from december last
year. Also don't see how MCP is relevant, it caused zero changes to muslc.
Adrian
On Fri 04-Nov-2016 10:19 AM, Vasily A. Sartakov wrote:
We have made some changes to muslc. If you diff against changeset
'615629bd6fcd6ddb69ad762e679f088c7bd878e2' you can see them. In particular
there are some changes to malloc that you could try reverting.
Unfortunately, I am using a relatively fresh version of seL4 and corresponding
libraries (3.2.x). The last sync with master trees was made just before MCP was
added (mid of September), thus, the diff with master is just the last
x86-related commit :(
Adrian
On Fri 04-Nov-2016 8:58 AM, Vasily A. Sartakov wrote:
Greetings.
I am keep working, and now I would like to discuss my second memory-related
issue. In contrast with first one, the second issue happens only in SCHED004
test, in malloc function:
helper_thread_t **threads = (helper_thread_t **)
malloc(sizeof(helper_thread_t*) * NUM_PRIOS);
malloc dies because there is no record inside TLB. someone tries to write
something to an address, for example, 0x54f1c8. This address is important
because it is located outside of the virtual memory allocated for the test.
Previous, elf_loader allocates a region and the region ends exactly on
0x54efff. I have experimented with different setups, added some debug
functions, and each time I saw the same picture: malloc dies because tries to
write to next page outside the allocated region.
I know what is the function tries to write. It is a pretrim, part of libmuslc:
static int pretrim(struct chunk *self, size_t n, int i, int j)
{
size_t n1;
struct chunk *next, *split;
/* We cannot pretrim if it would require re-binning. */
if (j < 40) return 0;
if (j < i+3) {
if (j != 63) return 0;
n1 = CHUNK_SIZE(self);
if (n1-n <= MMAP_THRESHOLD) return 0;
} else {
n1 = CHUNK_SIZE(self);
}
if (bin_index(n1-n) != j) return 0;
next = NEXT_CHUNK(self);
printf("next - %x, n1 = %x\n", next, n1);
split = (void *)((char *)self + n); <————— the split points
outside the allocated region
split->prev = self->prev; <————— here we die
split->next = self->next;
split->prev->next = split;
split->next->prev = split;
split->psize = n | C_INUSE;
split->csize = n1-n;
next->psize = n1-n;
self->csize = n | C_INUSE;
return 1;
}
As a previous, I would like to ask, should I keep in mind something platform
specific? maybe you have modified, like a_and asm functions or something else
in libmuslc?
Also, malloc itself raises questions:
void *malloc(size_t n)
{
struct chunk *c;
int i, j;
if (adjust_size(&n) < 0) return 0;
<….>
i = bin_index_up(n);
for (;;) {
uint64_t mask = mal.binmap & -(1ULL<<i);
mal.binmap is used uninitialised. also, when we set up bits inside it?
Moreover, I have different values on ARM (0x80000000000) and MIPS
(0x8000000000000000), I am not sure that it is ok
Thank you!
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://sel4.systems/lists/listinfo/devel
