From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from ar.aichi-u.ac.jp ([202.250.160.40]) by ttr; Sun May 4 04:22:25 EDT 2014 Received: from [192.168.1.105] ([125.193.25.135]) by ar; Sun May 4 17:22:15 JST 2014 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) Subject: Re: [9front] malloc From: arisawa In-Reply-To: <94FC2DC4-E47A-4B93-80B4-F0B3F8E98E04@ar.aichi-u.ac.jp> Date: Sun, 4 May 2014 17:22:14 +0900 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <2C84A967-414C-46AE-8BFC-7F40E77A0B25@ar.aichi-u.ac.jp> List-ID: <9front.9front.org> X-Glyph: ➈ X-Bullshit: secure component scripting-oriented locator References: <3B54C219-B268-4BAA-9638-62CEF6E18EDB@ar.aichi-u.ac.jp> <94FC2DC4-E47A-4B93-80B4-F0B3F8E98E04@ar.aichi-u.ac.jp> To: 9front@9front.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510) I have understood what cinap said by this: > if(dsize >= 0x80000000UL){ /* for sanity, overflow */ > werrstr("invalid allocation size"); > return nil; > } malloc(size) // size >= 2GB is checked by this. currently, this restriction is for both 9pc and 9pc64. On 2014/05/04, at 14:24, Kenji Arisawa wrote: > It seems malloc() has a problem with large size allocation.