Hi!
C says that aligned_alloc size must be an integral multiple of alignment.
While glibc doesn't care about it, apparently Solaris does.
So, this patch decreases the priority of aligned_alloc among the other
variants because it needs more work and can waste more memory and rounds
up the size to multiple of alignment.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux and in the PR Rainer
mentioned testing on Solaris, committed to trunk.
2021-11-18 Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com>
PR libgomp/102838
* alloc.c (gomp_aligned_alloc): Prefer _aligned_alloc over
memalign over posix_memalign over aligned_alloc over fallback
with malloc instead of aligned_alloc over _aligned_alloc over
posix_memalign over memalign over fallback with malloc. For
aligned_alloc, round up size up to multiple of al.
--- libgomp/alloc.c.jj 2021-01-04 10:25:56.157037659 +0100
+++ libgomp/alloc.c 2021-11-17 13:32:25.246271672 +0100
@@ -65,18 +65,24 @@ gomp_aligned_alloc (size_t al, size_t si
void *ret;
if (al < sizeof (void *))
al = sizeof (void *);
-#ifdef HAVE_ALIGNED_ALLOC
- ret = aligned_alloc (al, size);
-#elif defined(HAVE__ALIGNED_MALLOC)
+#ifdef HAVE__ALIGNED_MALLOC
ret = _aligned_malloc (size, al);
-#elif defined(HAVE_POSIX_MEMALIGN)
- if (posix_memalign (&ret, al, size) != 0)
- ret = NULL;
#elif defined(HAVE_MEMALIGN)
{
extern void *memalign (size_t, size_t);
ret = memalign (al, size);
}
+#elif defined(HAVE_POSIX_MEMALIGN)
+ if (posix_memalign (&ret, al, size) != 0)
+ ret = NULL;
+#lif defined(HAVE_ALIGNED_ALLOC)
+ {
+ size_t sz = (size + al - 1) & ~(al - 1);
+ if (__builtin_expect (sz >= size, 1))
+ ret = aligned_alloc (al, sz);
+ else
+ ret = NULL;
+ }
#else
ret = NULL;
if ((al & (al - 1)) == 0 && size)
Jakub
