Re: Windows 9X crash

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Cc: address@hidden
> From: Jussi Lahdenniemi <address@hidden>
> Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 11:35:20 +0200
> 
> > What fix did you have in mind?  Over-allocating and recording the
> > offset in the initial part of the block that we don't pass to the
> > application?
> 
> That was my first idea, yes.  Of course, this introduces some memory 
> overhead, especially if there are many small allocations.
> 
> A proposal patch is attached.  Reallocs needed some additional care, as 
> there are two special cases to handle (source being in dumped memory, 
> and source and destination alignments mismatching).

Thanks.  Fabrice, any comments to the patch?

I think the 9X-specific code should be #ifdef'ed away in 64-bit
builds, is that right?  The alignment code and the "p - 1" stuff is
wrong for 64-bit code anyway, I think.