This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] elf: dl-minimal malloc needs to respect fundamental alignment
- From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- To: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
- Cc: GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 05:54:45 -0700
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] elf: dl-minimal malloc needs to respect fundamental alignment
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20160621111702 dot 39A5B402F6E95 at oldenburg dot str dot redhat dot com>
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 4:17 AM, Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com> wrote:
> If malloc is used instead of memalign for small alignments,
> malloc needs to provide the ABI-required alignment.
>
> 2016-06-21 Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
>
> * elf/dl-minimal.c (malloc): Allocate with fundamental alignment.
>
> diff --git a/elf/dl-minimal.c b/elf/dl-minimal.c
> index c8a8f8d..2d7d139 100644
> --- a/elf/dl-minimal.c
> +++ b/elf/dl-minimal.c
> @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@
> #include <sys/types.h>
> #include <ldsodefs.h>
> #include <_itoa.h>
> +#include <stdalign.h>
>
> #include <assert.h>
>
> @@ -90,7 +91,7 @@ __libc_memalign (size_t align, size_t n)
> void * weak_function
> malloc (size_t n)
> {
> - return __libc_memalign (sizeof (double), n);
> + return __libc_memalign (_Alignof (max_align_t), n);
> }
>
> /* We use this function occasionally since the real implementation may
We also have MALLOC_ALIGNMENT in malloc. Should they be consistent?
--
H.J.