linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: (Re-Send) shmctl() returns corrupt value on pb1000.

To: takeshi_aihana@montavista.co.jp
Subject: Re: (Re-Send) shmctl() returns corrupt value on pb1000.
From: Atsushi Nemoto <nemoto@toshiba-tops.co.jp>
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002 21:49:57 +0900 (JST)
Cc: linux-mips@oss.sgi.com
In-reply-to: <m3d6v8znap.wl@aihana>
Organization: TOSHIBA Personal Computer System Corporation
References: <1022763778.1046.71.camel@aihana> <20020531.112847.74756483.nemoto@toshiba-tops.co.jp> <m3d6v8znap.wl@aihana>
Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com
>>>>> On Mon, 03 Jun 2002 19:09:18 +0900, Takeshi AIHANA 
>>>>> <takeshi_aihana@montavista.co.jp> said:
takeshi_aihana> There are any differences 'struct shmid_ds' between
takeshi_aihana> glibc-2.2.3 and 2.2.4 that I saw.  However, I do not
takeshi_aihana> think those diffs are caused this problem.  Because
takeshi_aihana> the 'shm_segsz` which a member of this will be
takeshi_aihana> allocated on same location even if the follows members
takeshi_aihana> behind 'shm_segsz' are changed; i.e. it will have same
takeshi_aihana> value as 'shm_segsz' on both different structure.  Is
takeshi_aihana> this right?

Did you check the contents of 'shm_perm'?  The type of shm_perm is
'struct ipc64_perm' in kernel and 'struct ipc_perm' in libc.  I
suppose these definitions are differ.

---
Atsushi Nemoto

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>