Hi Roy, Roy Lee wrote: > Sorry for the late response. > >> On Friday 16 May 2008, Helge Deller wrote: > >> shm05.c -> see my (untested!!!) patch below. >> Some architectures can only map at specific offsets. >> Current version "sucessfully" fails, because e.g. hppa can't map at cp+4096. >> So, it's not failing because the memory regions overlap, although that was >> intended to be tested... >> > > Your patch looks good to me. It does what I'm intended but failed to do; > eliminating > explicit arch-dependent code without breaking logics.
Ok. >> shm06.c now does basically the same test as shm04.c ?!? >> Doesn't make sense... >> I would revert the patch for shm06, but maybe others think different???? > > How about merge the scenario of shm06 into shm04, and then eliminate shm06? > > Modify shm04 to attach the same segment _twice_ to the child's address space. > In this case, the first returned address should be the same as where the > parent > attaches its segment to while the second returned address should be different. Yes, this is probably the best idea. Alternatively, just leave shm04 as-is, and do the twice-mapping you mentioned above in shm06. This way we'd keep two simple tests. Helge ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
