Ed Maste wrote in <CAPyFy2AipV4Uvf9G9=dskymwbfhtxtygko4uqwwfxvwwq2j...@mail.gmail.com>: |On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 at 17:29, Steffen Nurpmeso <[email protected]> wrote: |> Ed Maste wrote in |> <capyfy2a-dnbrivwzifojv4syl9qyxvozx2sk-bcd9pedf30...@mail.gmail.com>: |>|On Fri, 24 Feb 2023 at 20:27, Steffen Nurpmeso <[email protected]> \ |>|wrote: |>|> Me too. 'Was just thinking of allocators which give back valid |>|> but inaccessible memory for 0 bytes so that each access would |>|> fault. |>| |>|The size is not (necessarily) zero though. The alignment requested is. |> |> I personally would fail EINVAL for 0: something really must be |> bogus if you reqest an alignment of 0. The standard says |> |> Upon successful completion, posix_memalign( ) shall return zero; | |This is not posix_memalign, this is memalign which is provided for |glibc compatibility (and which accepts align == 0). This came up only |because Valgrind's tests triggered this case.
This is what happens when one mutilates the email quote context. --steffen | |Der Kragenbaer, The moon bear, |der holt sich munter he cheerfully and one by one |einen nach dem anderen runter wa.ks himself off |(By Robert Gernhardt)
