Messages in this thread | | | From | Michael Neuling <> | Subject | Re: restrict initial stack space expansion to rlimit - the process killer... | Date | Fri, 05 Mar 2010 07:40:04 +1100 |
| |
In message <op.u81oymnjzipv1w@pawels.alatek.krakow.pl> you wrote: > Dnia 04-03-2010 o 11:05:03 Am=C3=A9rico Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> = > = > > napisa=C5=82(a): > > > 2010/3/4 Pawe=C5=82 Sikora <pawel.sikora@agmk.net>: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> i'm currently testing the 2.6.32.9 and observing random process killi= > ng > >> on my builder machine (x86-64) which contains several tcl/bash > >> scripts for svn checkout, compilation, archive and ftp deploying. > >> > >> here's a fragment of build log: > >> > >> (...) > >> [CXX] obj-release-i486-gnu-linux/genMappingRst.o > >> [CXX] obj-release-i486-gnu-linux/otelloVerdiThread.o > >> i486-gnu-linux-g++: Internal error: Killed (program as) > >> Please submit a full bug report. > >> See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions. > >> make[1]: *** [obj-release-i486-gnu-linux/genMappingRst.o] Error 1 > >> > >> the builder process tree looks like this: > >> > >> $ pstree -Acl > >> ?---screen-+-bash---loop.sh-+-loop.sh---tclsh8.4---temp_9_12676174---= > tclsh8.4---temp_3_12676174---tclsh8.4---temp_4_12676174---tclsh8.4---tem= > p_9_12676176---make---make-+-sh---ccache---x86_64-gnu-linu-+-as > >> | > >> | > >> | `-cc1plus > >> | > >> | > >> `-sh---ccache---x86_64-gnu-linu-+-as > >> | > >> | > >> `-cc1plus > >> | `-tee > >> `-bash---pstree > >> > >> > >> as you can see there're few levels of bash and tclsh(8.4) > >> and make/ccache/binutils/g++ workers at the bottom. > >> > >> i've noticed that rolling back to the 2.6.32.8 (or just reverting > >> the 'ulimit -s' commit: 35e2093d5d7b632c083af3578c05876375828314) > >> fixes the problem. > >> > >> so, is it my stack ulimit (8192) to small, or maybe the new limit > >> calculations are wrong? shoud i bump the stack limit for new kernels?= > > > > > > > Please check if you have this patch: > > > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/2/15/61 > > > > Thanks! > > 2.6.32.9 + a17e18790a8c47113a73139d54a375dc9ccd8f08 works fine. > i think it should be pushed to 2.6.32.10 as soon as possible.
Agreed. It unfortunately missed .9 by a few hours.
Mikey
| |