Comment #14 on issue 272 by sabotag...@gmail.com: Attempting double-free on
IOS with SDL
http://code.google.com/p/address-sanitizer/issues/detail?id=272
I did some tests, after commenting the line in SDL_DestroySemaphore
SDL_syssem.c:119
Everything seems to be smooth no crashes or problems.
> On my 64-bit linux box running a 32-bit app I see this:
Yup, this is a known feature - 32-bit apps on 64-bit hosts use
complete address range. But on 32-bit hosts (x86, ARM, MIPS) this is
not the case. We should be able to detect whether underlying machine
is indeed 64-bit at runtime (e.g. using
On my 64-bit linux box running a 32-bit app I see this:
% cat addr.c
#include
#include
int main() {
int local;
printf("%p %p %p\n", &main, &local, malloc(10));
}
% g++ addr.c -m32 && ./a.out
0x8048414 0xff95481c 0x99de008
%
Stack is at 0xff95481c, so, the app uses the entire 4Gb range.
Wha
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Alexander Potapenko wrote:
> This sounds feasible.
> In order to do this we must also shrink the shadow gap so that those 256M
> can be actually used.
Cool. I see if I can prepare something this week.
-Y
--
You received this message because you are subscribed t
This sounds feasible.
In order to do this we must also shrink the shadow gap so that those 256M
can be actually used.
On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Yuri Gribov wrote:
> All,
>
> It looks like currently Asan reserves shadow even for kernel area (upper
> 2G for Windows and 1G for Linux). Is t
All,
It looks like currently Asan reserves shadow even for kernel area (upper 2G
for Windows and 1G for Linux). Is this really necessary? 256M of address
space may be important on 32-bit platforms.
-Y
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"address-sanit
