Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 19:46:43 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: joelh@gnu.org Cc: tlambert@primenet.com, chrisy@flix.net, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: sharable static arrays? Message-ID: <199801131946.MAA14965@usr01.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <199801130506.XAA02903@detlev.UUCP> from "Joel Ray Holveck" at Jan 12, 98 11:06:28 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Ideally, all static data should be mapped copy-on-write. I don't > > think it's mapped, at this point; it probably needs a seperate ELF > > section from the rest of data, to (1) force it to a page boundry > > for it's mapping and (2) allow it to have seperate section flags to > > indicate it should be treated as copy-on-write. > > Is it possible with a.out? (Yes, I know, I should learn more about > the object file formats, does anybody have good pointers?) Sean pointed out that he thinks the original poster wanted shared memory that could be declared in a program. What we used to call a "Monitor Common Block" back in the old FORTRAN days. If you want to make a distinction between static and static global, I still say you need a different section ID for the thing. No, a.out does not support multiple sections. Yes, there is a weird way to get this stuff in. You can make the a.out image bigger than the a.out header says it is, and put a header there. That's what the "splashkit" stuff does. It's also what LISP and FORTH tend to do, if they are written right, in order to put "precompiled code" out there. So there are possible conflicts. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199801131946.MAA14965>