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 22:51:31 GMT


Gregory Shimansky wrote:
> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>
>>
>> Gregory Shimansky wrote:
>>>>
>>> -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 thought it is a starting stack size, like -Xms for heap size. Now that 
> I searched the web it appears that it is the maximum indeed.

"0" is minimum stack size.

> 
>> 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.
> 
> I think 64-bit SuSE9 is just the only weird distribution which doesn't 
> have this limit. In 10th version they fixed this. So ulimit -s is not 
> necessary in most cases.

But harmless.  And it makes the test predicable across platforms.  and 
if the StackSize test is forked, we can make it small to make it quick...

> 
> I'd still like to have a recursion limit in StackTest but Rana has 
> convinced me that no SOE shouldn't mean that test has failed. I'll patch 
> it now.
> 

I agree that your fix is utterly bogus :) but we want to test SOE 
machinery, so I think that we should set the ulimit to ensure an 
environment in which the SOE will happen if DRLVM is working right. 
Therefore, we need to set things up such that not getting an SOE is 
indeed a failure.

geir



Mime
View raw message