Re: memcpy(): alignment error

Thank you so much.
This was exactly the fault.



Am 2014-10-21 23:31, schrieb Adam Lackorzynski:
> Hi,
> 
> On Mon Oct 20, 2014 at 20:32:20 +0200, ba_f wrote:
>> Am 2014-10-19 23:48, schrieb Adam Lackorzynski:
>> >
>> >The alignment fault address is different (80006ece) from those mentioned
>> >in the memcpy (0x80006e80-0x80006e88). Are you sure it is the memcpy?
>> >
>> >Adam
>> 
>> I do printf()-debugging.
>> 
>> #define STORE32N(buffer,offset,value)   { printf("memcpy(%x, %x,
>> 4);\n",&buffer[offset], &value); memcpy(&buffer[offset], &value, 4);
>> printf("No error, yet???\n");}
>> 
>> 
>> And output is the following:
>> 
>> client  | memcpy(80004e8e, 80004e3c, 4);
>> KERNEL0: alignment error at 80004e8e (PC: 00077a00, SP: 80004ac0, FSR:
>> 410801, PSR: 60000010)
>> client  | No signal handler found
>> 
>> printf("No error, yet???\n") is not reached. Client is broken, then.
> 
> Ok, so there's an unaligned address for the destination. Maybe you're
> running into something like this:
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24883410/armcc-problems-with-memcpy-alignment-exceptions
> Assuming your buffer array is properly aligned on the stack, its data
> type size seems to be != 4 (smaller?), why copy 4 bytes there?
> And, why not just buffer[offset] = value? I'm sure the compiler would
> do it just right.
> 
>> Is there something special to consider, since running an l4re-App?
>> Something like request_mem(), or editing a configuration file?
> 
> No, it just has to work. You could switch off alignment checking in the
> Fiasco config to allow such unaligned accesses. Still, with the 
> checking
> on, such alignment issues should not happen.
> 
> 
> 
> Adam