Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 10:32:56 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: mmap() and gcc precompiled headers
Message-ID: <20030703143255.GE25320@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <3F034280 DOT 6070908 AT agilent DOT com> <20030703094728 DOT GC22232 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <20030703141942 DOT GB25320 AT redhat DOT com> <20030703143010 DOT GV1165 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20030703143010.GV1165@cygbert.vinschen.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 04:30:10PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 10:19:42AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 11:47:28AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> >Do you mean something like this:
>> >
>> >  If addr is given, check if it's 64K aligned.  If not, align and
>> >  raise the memory requirement accordingly.  Call MapViewOfFileEx
>> >  with the aligned address.  If it works, return the addr given as
>> >  parameter, otherwise return MapViewOfFileEx(NULL).
>> 
>> How about, instead, just use the address and if it fails and is not
>> MAP_FIXED, use MapViewOfFileEx without the address?
>
>Yep, that's the simple approach.  I dropped this suggestion from my
>original reply since it requires addr to be on a 64k boundary.  
>Unfortunately I have no idea if the chance to succeed might be better
>or worse than using the more complex approach.
>
>Either way, it's not us but gcc being on the wrong track.  If gcc relies
>on getting the same address it should use MAP_FIXED at least on hosts
>known to support MAP_FIXED correctly.

Anyone want to try patching gcc and sending a message to gcc-patches?

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/