1. what am I missing?
- Posted by jacques_desch Jun 18, 2009
- 1150 views
- Last edited Jun 19, 2009
here C code from termbits.h
typedef unsigned char cc_t;
typedef unsigned int speed_t;
typedef unsigned int tcflag_t;
- define NCCS 19 /* there should be a sharp character before define not 1. */
struct termios2 {
tcflag_t c_iflag; /* input mode flags */
tcflag_t c_oflag; /* output mode flags */
tcflag_t c_cflag; /* control mode flags */
tcflag_t c_lflag; /* local mode flags */
cc_t c_line; /* line discipline */
cc_t c_cc[NCCS]; /* control characters */
speed_t c_ispeed; /* input speed */
speed_t c_ospeed; /* output speed */
};
from this I compute 44 bytes for termios2 struct:
4*4 + 1 + 19 + 2*4 = 44
But if I allocate 44 bytes my program crash.
I must allocate 45 bytes for it to works. Where is the missing byte?
Jacques
2. Re: what am I missing?
- Posted by DerekParnell (admin) Jun 18, 2009
- 1181 views
- Last edited Jun 19, 2009
here C code from termbits.h
typedef unsigned char cc_t; typedef unsigned int speed_t; typedef unsigned int tcflag_t; #define NCCS 19 struct termios2 { tcflag_t c_iflag; /* input mode flags */ tcflag_t c_oflag; /* output mode flags */ tcflag_t c_cflag; /* control mode flags */ tcflag_t c_lflag; /* local mode flags */ cc_t c_line; /* line discipline */ cc_t c_cc[NCCS]; /* control characters */ speed_t c_ispeed; /* input speed */ speed_t c_ospeed; /* output speed */ };
from this I compute 44 bytes for termios2 struct:
4*4 + 1 + 19 + 2*4 = 44
But if I allocate 44 bytes my program crash. I must allocate 45 bytes for it to works. Where is the missing byte?
Jacques
The C language leaves the packaging of data within a struct up to the compiler. Most compliers add padding bytes in order to ensure alignment of data on certain boundaries. In this case, it would appear that it tries to make sure that each new field begins on an even address, so I'm guessing there is a hidden padding byte between c_line and c_cc fields. However, that would also mean that you need to allocate 46 bytes because there should also be a padding byte after c_cc field.
By the way, in this forum you can use {{{ }}} to set aside a block of text that is not inspected for markup tags such as '#'.
3. Re: what am I missing?
- Posted by mattlewis (admin) Jun 19, 2009
- 1170 views
here C code from termbits.h
typedef unsigned char cc_t; typedef unsigned int speed_t; typedef unsigned int tcflag_t; #define NCCS 19 struct termios2 { tcflag_t c_iflag; /* input mode flags */ tcflag_t c_oflag; /* output mode flags */ tcflag_t c_cflag; /* control mode flags */ tcflag_t c_lflag; /* local mode flags */ cc_t c_line; /* line discipline */ cc_t c_cc[NCCS]; /* control characters */ speed_t c_ispeed; /* input speed */ speed_t c_ospeed; /* output speed */ };
from this I compute 44 bytes for termios2 struct:
4*4 + 1 + 19 + 2*4 = 44
But if I allocate 44 bytes my program crash. I must allocate 45 bytes for it to works. Where is the missing byte?
Jacques
The C language leaves the packaging of data within a struct up to the compiler. Most compliers add padding bytes in order to ensure alignment of data on certain boundaries. In this case, it would appear that it tries to make sure that each new field begins on an even address, so I'm guessing there is a hidden padding byte between c_line and c_cc fields. However, that would also mean that you need to allocate 46 bytes because there should also be a padding byte after c_cc field.
Yes, it's very compiler dependent. I added the following to your struct definition:
#include <stdio.h> int main(){ struct termios2 t; printf("termios2: %d\n", sizeof( struct termios2 ) ); printf("c_iflag: %p\n", &t.c_iflag ); printf("c_oflag: %p\n", &t.c_oflag ); printf("c_cflag: %p\n", &t.c_cflag ); printf("c_lflag: %p\n", &t.c_lflag ); printf("c_line: %p\n", &t.c_line ); printf("c_cc: %p\n", &t.c_cc ); printf("c_ispeed: %p\n", &t.c_ispeed ); printf("c_ospeed: %p\n", &t.c_ospeed ); return 0; }And with OpenWatcom v1.8, here's what I got:
termios2: 44 c_iflag: 0006fe68 c_oflag: 0006fe6c c_cflag: 0006fe70 c_lflag: 0006fe74 c_line: 0006fe78 c_cc: 0006fe79 c_ispeed: 0006fe8c c_ospeed: 0006fe90So OW1.8 at least doesn't pad between byte sized members.
Matt
4. Re: what am I missing?
- Posted by SDPringle Jun 19, 2009
- 1140 views
You guys shouldn't be counting bytes. Use the sizeof() operator the C compiler will tell you how big the structure is.
5. Re: what am I missing?
- Posted by jacques_desch Jun 19, 2009
- 1146 views
You guys shouldn't be counting bytes. Use the sizeof() operator the C compiler will tell you how big the structure is.
I'm not writing C code but euphoria binding to termios, so sizeof() is of no use to me. Anyway there is not padding as when I peek the struct all members are at expected position here the code:
function peek_termios(atom pTermios) return peek4u({pTermios,4}) & peek(pTermios+16) & {peek({pTermios+17,NCCS})} & peek4u({pTermios+17+NCCS,2}) end function
the extra byte is at end of allocated struct. Matt code give this on Linpus lite compiled with gcc 4.1.2
termios2: 44 c_iflag: 0xbfc9e408 c_oflag: 0xbfc9e40c c_cflag: 0xbfc9e410 c_lflag: 0xbfc9e414 c_line: 0xbfc9e418 c_cc: 0xbfc9e419 c_ispeed: 0xbfc9e42c c_ospeed: 0xbfc9e430So there is no padding between fields but allocationg 44 crash my program. Well I will take it as a mystery and go on with TERMIOS_SIZE=45
jacques
6. Re: what am I missing?
- Posted by mattlewis (admin) Jun 19, 2009
- 1141 views
the extra byte is at end of allocated struct. Matt code give this on Linpus lite compiled with gcc 4.1.2
termios2: 44 c_iflag: 0xbfc9e408 c_oflag: 0xbfc9e40c c_cflag: 0xbfc9e410 c_lflag: 0xbfc9e414 c_line: 0xbfc9e418 c_cc: 0xbfc9e419 c_ispeed: 0xbfc9e42c c_ospeed: 0xbfc9e430So there is no padding between fields but allocationg 44 crash my program. Well I will take it as a mystery and go on with TERMIOS_SIZE=45
That's odd. What happens if you do the same in C? Meaning, can you malloc 44 bytes and not have it crash?
It sounds like the code is writing out of bounds somewhere. Actually, I'd recommend running it under valgrind, so see where the illegal access is happening. Sounds like a bug in the library. If you do any C coding on Linux, valgrind can be your best friend for tracking down weird memory issues.
Matt
7. Re: what am I missing?
- Posted by jacques_desch Jun 19, 2009
- 1146 views
the extra byte is at end of allocated struct. Matt code give this on Linpus lite compiled with gcc 4.1.2
termios2: 44 c_iflag: 0xbfc9e408 c_oflag: 0xbfc9e40c c_cflag: 0xbfc9e410 c_lflag: 0xbfc9e414 c_line: 0xbfc9e418 c_cc: 0xbfc9e419 c_ispeed: 0xbfc9e42c c_ospeed: 0xbfc9e430So there is no padding between fields but allocationg 44 crash my program. Well I will take it as a mystery and go on with TERMIOS_SIZE=45
That's odd. What happens if you do the same in C? Meaning, can you malloc 44 bytes and not have it crash?
It sounds like the code is writing out of bounds somewhere. Actually, I'd recommend running it under valgrind, so see where the illegal access is happening. Sounds like a bug in the library. If you do any C coding on Linux, valgrind can be your best friend for tracking down weird memory issues.
Matt
Matt, Following you suggestion, here de C code I tested and it crash too, but only if I free t pointer. The same is true in my euphoria binding.
#include <stdio.h> #include <asm/termbits.h> #include <sys/types.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdlib.h> int main(){ int fd, fnVal; struct termios2 *t; fd = open("/dev/tty0",O_RDONLY); printf("file handle %d\n", fd); t = malloc(sizeof(struct termios2)); fnVal = tcgetattr(fd, t); printf("ispeed %d, ospeed %d\n",t->c_ispeed, t->c_ospeed); free(t); // it doesn't crash if I don't free t. puts("t freed\n"); close(fd); }Now the question is why freeing t, which is no more used, crash the program?
8. Re: what am I missing?
- Posted by mattlewis (admin) Jun 19, 2009
- 1165 views
Matt, Following you suggestion, here de C code I tested and it crash too, but only if I free t pointer. The same is true in my euphoria binding.
#include <stdio.h> #include <asm/termbits.h> #include <sys/types.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdlib.h> int main(){ int fd, fnVal; struct termios2 *t; fd = open("/dev/tty0",O_RDONLY); printf("file handle %d\n", fd); t = malloc(sizeof(struct termios2)); fnVal = tcgetattr(fd, t); printf("ispeed %d, ospeed %d\n",t->c_ispeed, t->c_ospeed); free(t); // it doesn't crash if I don't free t. puts("t freed\n"); close(fd); }Now the question is why freeing t, which is no more used, crash the program?
I think you're using the wrong header. See the man page, here.
Looks like the correct size is actually 60. Try this code:
#include <stdio.h> #include <termios.h> #include <fcntl.h> int main(){ int fd, fnVal; struct termios *t; printf("termios %d\n", sizeof( struct termios ) ); fd = open("/dev/tty",O_RDONLY); printf("file handle %d\n", fd); t = malloc(sizeof(struct termios)); fnVal = tcgetattr(fd, t); printf("fnVal %d ispeed %d, ospeed %d\n", fnVal, t->c_ispeed, t->c_ospeed); free(t); // it doesn't crash if I don't free t. puts("t freed\n"); close(fd); }Matt
9. Re: what am I missing?
- Posted by jacques_desch Jun 19, 2009
- 1153 views
Matt, Following you suggestion, here de C code I tested and it crash too, but only if I free t pointer. The same is true in my euphoria binding.
#include <stdio.h> #include <asm/termbits.h> #include <sys/types.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdlib.h> int main(){ int fd, fnVal; struct termios2 *t; fd = open("/dev/tty0",O_RDONLY); printf("file handle %d\n", fd); t = malloc(sizeof(struct termios2)); fnVal = tcgetattr(fd, t); printf("ispeed %d, ospeed %d\n",t->c_ispeed, t->c_ospeed); free(t); // it doesn't crash if I don't free t. puts("t freed\n"); close(fd); }Now the question is why freeing t, which is no more used, crash the program?
I think you're using the wrong header. See the man page, here.
Looks like the correct size is actually 60. Try this code:
#include <stdio.h> #include <termios.h> #include <fcntl.h> int main(){ int fd, fnVal; struct termios *t; printf("termios %d\n", sizeof( struct termios ) ); fd = open("/dev/tty",O_RDONLY); printf("file handle %d\n", fd); t = malloc(sizeof(struct termios)); fnVal = tcgetattr(fd, t); printf("fnVal %d ispeed %d, ospeed %d\n", fnVal, t->c_ispeed, t->c_ospeed); free(t); // it doesn't crash if I don't free t. puts("t freed\n"); close(fd); }Matt
You got Matt, many Thanks.
10. Re: what am I missing?
- Posted by jacques_desch Jun 19, 2009
- 1171 views
I meant: You got it Matt...
11. Re: what am I missing?
- Posted by jacques_desch Jun 19, 2009
- 1152 views
I found the good definition of termios in <bits/termios.h> the only difference with termios2 is the NCCS which is 32 instead of 19 which give 57 bytes although sizeof() report 60, probably pad end of struct to align DWORD.
Jacques
12. Re: what am I missing?
- Posted by jacques_desch Jun 19, 2009
- 1127 views
A final comment on this thread. I finaly found where the padding is in the struct.
first the definition as per <bits/termios.h>:
typedef unsigned char cc_t; typedef unsigned int speed_t; typedef unsigned int tcflag_t; #define NCCS 32 struct termios { tcflag_t c_iflag; /* input mode flags */ tcflag_t c_oflag; /* output mode flags */ tcflag_t c_cflag; /* control mode flags */ tcflag_t c_lflag; /* local mode flags */ cc_t c_line; /* line discipline */ cc_t c_cc[NCCS]; /* control characters */ speed_t c_ispeed; /* input speed */ speed_t c_ospeed; /* output speed */ #define _HAVE_STRUCT_TERMIOS_C_ISPEED 1 #define _HAVE_STRUCT_TERMIOS_C_OSPEED 1 };The catch here is that c_ispeed doesn't follow immedialely the c_cc[NCCS] array. There is 3 bytes of padding. It is why sizeof(struct termios) report 60 bytes.
Not nice for those who try to bind C code to hide such information.
Jacques
13. Re: what am I missing?
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Jun 20, 2009
- 1089 views
You guys shouldn't be counting bytes. Use the sizeof() operator the C compiler will tell you how big the structure is.
I'm not writing C code but euphoria binding to termios, so sizeof() is of no use to me.
jacques
The catch here is that c_ispeed doesn't follow immedialely the c_cc[NCCS] array. There is 3 bytes of padding. It is why sizeof(struct termios) report 60 bytes. Not nice for those who try to bind C code to hide such information. Jacques
Agreed. In general, I'd recommend writing a partical C wrapper in between the library and the part of the wrapper written in Euphoria, in the way Matt has a custom C library that wraps wxWidgets in C first before being wrapped in Eu, and the way Irv used to have a C library that wrapped parts of GTK (like the C macros which otherwise had to be ported by hand and then hardcoded in Eu) for euGTK.
In fact, I seem to recall that the C library wrapper for EuGTK specifically had functions that merely returned the value of a sizeof().