Bart Smaalders wrote: > Roland Mainz wrote: > > Eric Lowe wrote: > >>>> but there's too much code out there that just breaks. The > >>>> programmers made implicit assumptions about the approximate > >>>> size of a page, and that was that. > >>> Which code breaks ? Userland or kernel code ? Was > >> Userland. The problem is that mmap() exposed too much detail > >> and as a result assumptions about sysconf(_SC_PAGESIZE) or > >> even the range of possible values resulted in programs dying > >> when sysconf returns 64K for the pagesize. In other words, > >> the value of sysconf(_SC_PAGESIZE) has sort of defacto ended> > >> up baked into the Solaris ABI in an unintentional way. > > > > ... but how ? I've read the ABI specs and mmap(2) several times and the > > only thing which AFAIK may be possible is trouble with MAP_FIXED and > > rounding. But that's again not in the ABI, it's just that the > > applications make special assumptions about the page size. > > > > I assume this also means a (hypothetical) SPARC CPU which only supports > > 16k and 256k pages cannot be supported by Solaris, right ? > > Grab a chunk of VA (w/ mmap_noreserve) and then try and > allocate several pages inside w/ guard pages. If you > grabbed a fixed size area initially, your code is broken > if someone mucks enough w/ the page size.
Do you have any pseudocode around for this ? ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED] \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;) _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
