This is the mail archive of the
glibc-bugs@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
[Bug malloc/15089] malloc_trim always trims for large padding
- From: "izetip at yahoo dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla at sourceware dot org>
- To: glibc-bugs at sourceware dot org
- Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2013 23:55:45 +0000
- Subject: [Bug malloc/15089] malloc_trim always trims for large padding
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-15089-131@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15089
--- Comment #2 from Thiago Ize <izetip at yahoo dot com> 2013-02-01 23:55:45 UTC ---
I didn't realize that when the result is converted to a long that it would give
the correct signed result (most of the time). Shame on me. However, I still
detect it doing the wrong thing for very large pad sizes, such as (size_t)-1,
combined with when there are more than 1 pages that can be released. I wrote a
little test program to make sure this time:
const size_t pagesz = 4096;
const size_t MINSIZE = 8;
long top_size = 12800;
size_t pad = -1;
long extra_bad = (top_size - pad - MINSIZE - 1) & ~(pagesz - 1);
long x = top_size - ((long)MINSIZE) - 1;
long good_extra = x <= pad? -1 : (x - ((long)pad)) & ~(pagesz - 1);
printf("top_size: %ld pad:%zu gives %ld %ld\n", top_size, pad,
good_extra, extra_bad);
It returns:
top_size: 12800 pad:18446744073709551615 gives -1 12288
So clearly in this case it's doing the wrong thing.
Finally, just to prove this happens in the actual glibc code, here's a gdb
output from CentOS 6 (glibc 2.12) that shows extra is positive even though pad
> top_size:
Breakpoint 2, sYSTRIm (s=18446744073709551615) at malloc.c:3475
3475 if (extra > 0) {
3: pad = 18446744073709551615
2: extra = 12288
1: top_size = 13536
--
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.