harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <g...@pobox.com>
Subject Re: [drlvm][em64t] build fails
Date Wed, 15 Nov 2006 22:23:16 GMT

Gregory Shimansky wrote:
> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>> Gregory Shimansky wrote:
>>> Pavel Afremov wrote:
>>>> On 11/13/06, Gregory Shimansky <gshimansky@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> So what is the point to have a test which would pass either way? Check
>>>>> that it doesn't crash the VM, is it the only purpose for it?
>>>> I think yes. It should check that test doesn't crash VM if stack 
>>>> size isn't
>>>> enough.
>>> But we wouldn't know that SOE has happened or not if test passes even 
>>> when SOE was not thrown.
>>> It seems like SuSE9 is the only existing distribution which doesn't 
>>> limit stack size on 64-bit architectures. SuSE10 has this limit and 
>>> Gentoo has it too. Should we care that this test fails on SuSE9 when 
>>> it passes on all other platforms and SOE is known to be thrown?
>> How could there be no limit to stack size??
> Well there is no stack limit imposed by the OS on SuSE9. Maybe it is 
> specific to this version because on SuSE10 there is a normal limit of 
> 8Mb. But when I run ulimit -a on SuSE9 I see this:
> core file size        (blocks, -c) unlimited
> data seg size         (kbytes, -d) unlimited
> file size             (blocks, -f) unlimited
> max locked memory     (kbytes, -l) unlimited
> max memory size       (kbytes, -m) unlimited
> open files                    (-n) 4096
> pipe size          (512 bytes, -p) 8
> stack size            (kbytes, -s) unlimited
> cpu time             (seconds, -t) unlimited
> max user processes            (-u) 40960
> virtual memory        (kbytes, -v) unlimited
> So the stack may grow up to the virtual address range which is pretty 
> huge on 64-bit platforms. No physical memory is enough to allocate stack 
> this big, so the system starts swapping nonstop. Maybe OOM linux killer 
> will kill this process after some time, maybe not.
>> Is there a way the test framework could set this?  Does DRLVM support 
>> -Xss yet?
> -Xss is the lower stack limit, it doesn't specify the maximum stack 
> size, doesn't it?

What does "lower stack limit" mean? :)  I think that it's the size of 
the stack, max.

I think all you need to do then is set the stack size :

    ulimit -s 8192

or something.  We should probably do this before each run on linux so 
that things are well defined and reproducible.



View raw message