incubator-stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Liviu Nicoara <nikko...@hates.ms>
Subject Re: STDCXX-1066 [was: Re: STDCXX forks]
Date Sun, 23 Sep 2012 22:19:39 GMT
On 9/23/12 5:50 PM, Stefan Teleman wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Stefan Teleman
> <stefan.teleman@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The second URL says this:
>>
>> <QUOTE>
>> Due to a change in the implementation of the userland mutexes
>> introduced by CR 6296770 in KU 137111-01, objects of type mutex_t and
>> pthread_mutex_t must start at 8-byte aligned addresses. If this
>> requirement is not satisfied, all non-compliant applications on
>> Solaris/SPARC may fail with the signal SEGV with a callstack similar
>> to the following one or with similar callstacks containing the
>> function mutex_trylock_process.
>>
>>    \*_atomic_cas_64(0x141f2c, 0x0, 0xff000000, 0x1651, 0xff000000, 0x466d90)
>>    set_lock_byte64(0x0, 0x1651, 0xff000000, 0x0, 0xfec82a00, 0x0)
>>    fast_process_lock(0x141f24, 0x0, 0x1, 0x1, 0x0, 0xfeae5780)
>>
>> </QUOTE>
>
> Here's a link to an official datatype alignment table for SPARCV8:
>
> http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19205-01/819-5267/bkbkl/index.html
>
> The interesting table is:
>
> Table B–2 Storage Sizes and Default Alignments in Bytes

I see nothing really outstanding here. What is it that I should pay attention to?

Thanks,
Liviu

Mime
View raw message