Re: [bug-gawk] Memory corruption after asort() in gawk 4.1.0 on Solaris 10

[Aharon Robbins]

Hi.

Andy's questions are all on target.  I agree there should be no
difference between the two statements.

Please let us know more details.

Thanks,

Arnold

> Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2013 14:28:55 -0400
> From: "Andrew J. Schorr" <address@hidden>
> To: Joakim ?stlund XO <address@hidden>
> Cc: "address@hidden" <address@hidden>
> Subject: Re: [bug-gawk] Memory corruption after asort() in gawk 4.1.0 on
>  Solaris 10
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 07:55:43AM +0000, Joakim ?stlund XO wrote:
> > After some experimentation, we managed to narrow the issue down to line 919 
> > of array.c:
> > 
> > *array = *result; /* copy result into array */
> > 
> > If this line is replaced with "memcpy(array, result, sizeof(NODE));", the 
> > problem disappears.
> > I have looked at the source for gawk 4.0.1, and this part of the code is 
> > identical, but I also noticed that the implementation of freenode() has 
> > been changed, which might be the root cause here.
>
> Perhaps I am being idiotic, but it appears to me that those statements should
> do the same thing.  The only reasons I can imagine for an error when using the
> direct assignment vs memcpy are an alignment problem, or a compiler bug.  Are
> you using gcc on Solaris?  Is it the same version that works OK on Linux?  Do
> you have the same problem if you disable all compiler optimizations?
>
> Regards,
> Andy