Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 13:10:36 +1100 From: Peter Jeremy <peter.jeremy@alcatel.com.au> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: sparse core dumps Message-ID: <20010215131036.W90937@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au> In-Reply-To: <200102150018.RAA09453@usr08.primenet.com>; from tlambert@primenet.com on Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 12:18:53AM %2B0000 References: <xzpd7cltrkj.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <200102150018.RAA09453@usr08.primenet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2001-Feb-15 00:18:53 +0000, Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> wrote: >> > One reason is that it is a bug for PAGE_SIZE to be visible to applications. >> >> Fair enough. > >That's like saying that it's a bug for alignment boundaries to be >visible to the application (which they are, on architectures where >unaligned accesses result in faults, either because of the fault >causing a failure, or because of the fault being detectable through >profiling aligned vs. unaligned access, and therefore detecting the >fixup). I think the intention was that a userland reference to the macro PAGE_SIZE (hard-coded to 4096, 8192 or some other value) is a bug. Applications should be using getpagesize(3) instead. (And of course, neither approach covers the situation where different parts of the address space effectively have different page sizes). Peter To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010215131036.W90937>