This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] malloc: Correct malloc alignment on 32-bit architectures [BZ #6527]
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
- Cc: <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 20:29:13 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] malloc: Correct malloc alignment on 32-bit architectures [BZ #6527]
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20160513183544 dot 9694240223A68 at oldenburg dot str dot redhat dot com>
On Fri, 13 May 2016, Florian Weimer wrote:
> We need to increase the malloc state version number, so that binaries
> containing dumped heaps of the new layout will not try to run on
> previous versions of glibc, resulting in obscure crashes.
This increase is global for all architectures. Do I understand correctly
that it's harmless for architectures where malloc alignment isn't being
If we wished to increase alignment on another architecture, and didn't do
so before 2.24 is released, would we need to increase this version again?
Do people think we should increase alignment on 32-bit x86, so that malloc
returns memory properly aligned for _Decimal128 (the way the decimal
floating-point specification adds the type means that malloc is meant to
return memory appropriately aligned for it, and its alignment happens to
be 16-byte) and __float128?
Joseph S. Myers