Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2002 07:08:29 +1100 From: Peter Jeremy <peter.jeremy@alcatel.com.au> To: Volker Stolz <stolz@hyperion.informatik.rwth-aachen.de> Cc: alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: rpc.statd/SIOCGIFCONF revisited Message-ID: <20020204070828.B70935@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au> In-Reply-To: <20020130224621.A14154@i2.informatik.rwth-aachen.de>; from stolz@hyperion.informatik.rwth-aachen.de on Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 10:46:21PM %2B0100 References: <20020130224621.A14154@i2.informatik.rwth-aachen.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 10:46:21PM +0100, Volker Stolz wrote: >Now the userland code in e.g. libc/rpc/get_myaddress.c memcpy tried >now to access XX which obviusly isn't at an 8 byte aligned address. > >memcpy() *should* be able to copy this region. *But*: >memcpy() gets optimized by gcc to use floating point registers >(unless you specify -fno-builtin). These instructions can only work >on double word aligned data :-/ This is a bug in gcc - memcpy() must be able to handle arbitrarily aligned operands. > Something similar happens when you use an assignment like foo = *bar. This is reasonable. bar must be correctly aligned unless you're doing something unportable. Peter To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020204070828.B70935>