May 5, 2019
8:58 p.m.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47125 --- Comment #3 from Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> --- (In reply to jeffersoncarpenter2 from comment #2) > (In reply to Austin English from comment #1) > > Does it actually cause a problem? I'm fairly certain that's expected > > behavior. > > Expected behavior for what reason? I don't know if this is a problem > (valgrind fails to recognize an instruction later and kills the program, > then there's an invalid write reported from the SIGILL handler), but if it > were expected and correct behavior, then why print a warning? >From loader/preloader.c: * To do this, we implement our own shared object loader that reserves memory * that is important to Wine, and then loads the main binary and its ELF * interpreter. * * We will try to set up the stack and memory area so that the program that * loads after us (eg. the wine binary) never knows we were here, except that * areas of memory it needs are already magically reserved. * * The following memory areas are important to Wine: * 0x00000000 - 0x00110000 the DOS area * 0x80000000 - 0x81000000 the shared heap * ??? - ??? the PE binary load address (usually starting at 0x00400000) -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.