stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Teleman <stefan.tele...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: STDCXX-1066 [was: Re: STDCXX forks]
Date Sun, 23 Sep 2012 21:50:19 GMT
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

--Stefan

-- 
Stefan Teleman
KDE e.V.
stefan.teleman@gmail.com

Mime
View raw message