On 18 Jun 2019, at 14:19, Viktor Ashirov <vashirov(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 2:10 PM William Brown <wbrown(a)suse.de> wrote:
>
> Memalign is pretty important - the short version is "we can not remove
it".
> I didn't say "remove", I said "review".
>
> There are some structures in the code that rely on this for performance to guarantee
that they memory is aligned to a page boundary, or cache line boundary. In some cases
it's required to allow the atomics to work in nunc-stans (well, lfds, but the value of
that today is questionable when the rust version is possibly safer and faster).
> Since you're the expert in this area, maybe you can leave a comment in the issue
linked above with the justification for upstream to reconsider?
You mean upstream LSAN/ASAN in this case, yes?
Yes, this
https://github.com/google/sanitizers/issues/723
Reading the report, that is only about mprotect of alligned memory, not of memory that is
just aligned. Perhaps our issue is different?
—
Sincerely,
William Brown
Senior Software Engineer, 389 Directory Server
SUSE Labs
_______________________________________________
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-devel@lists.fedoraproje...
--
Viktor
_______________________________________________
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-devel@lists.fedoraproje...
—
Sincerely,
William Brown
Senior Software Engineer, 389 Directory Server
SUSE Labs