Re: Likely empty space in a processes's virtual address space

2011-04-14 Thread Dave Martin
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 12:09 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > Dave Martin writes: >> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:11 PM, Michael Hope >> wrote: >>> Hi there.  The address space randomisation feature in 2.6.35 and above >>> kernels breaks GCC's precompiled headers support.  GCC works by >>> compili

Re: Likely empty space in a processes's virtual address space

2011-04-14 Thread Richard Sandiford
Dave Martin writes: > On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:11 PM, Michael Hope > wrote: >> Hi there.  The address space randomisation feature in 2.6.35 and above >> kernels breaks GCC's precompiled headers support.  GCC works by >> compiling the header once, dumping the internal format out to disk, >> and

Re: Likely empty space in a processes's virtual address space

2011-04-14 Thread Dave Martin
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:11 PM, Michael Hope wrote: > Hi there.  The address space randomisation feature in 2.6.35 and above > kernels breaks GCC's precompiled headers support.  GCC works by > compiling the header once, dumping the internal format out to disk, > and then mmap()ing it back in at

Re: Likely empty space in a processes's virtual address space

2011-04-13 Thread Nicolas Pitre
On Thu, 14 Apr 2011, Michael Hope wrote: > Hi there. The address space randomisation feature in 2.6.35 and above > kernels breaks GCC's precompiled headers support. GCC works by > compiling the header once, dumping the internal format out to disk, > and then mmap()ing it back in at a fixed addre

Likely empty space in a processes's virtual address space

2011-04-13 Thread Michael Hope
Hi there. The address space randomisation feature in 2.6.35 and above kernels breaks GCC's precompiled headers support. GCC works by compiling the header once, dumping the internal format out to disk, and then mmap()ing it back in at a fixed address. The solution for other architectures is for G