[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <617E1C2C70743745A92448908E030B2A01AF8CE6@scsmsx411.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 11:22:02 -0700
From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To: "Peter Zijlstra" <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
"Ollie Wild" <aaw@...gle.com>
Cc: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<parisc-linux@...ts.parisc-linux.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
<linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...l.org>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>, "Andi Kleen" <ak@...e.de>
Subject: RE: [patch 0/3] no MAX_ARG_PAGES -v2
> > Interesting. If you're exceeding your stack ulimit, you should be
> > seeing either an "argument list too long" message or getting a
> > SIGSEGV. Have you tried bypassing wc and piping the output straight
> > to a file?
>
> I think it sends SIGKILL on failure paths.
Setting stack limit to unlimited I managed to exec with 10MB, and
"wc" produced the correct output when it (finally) ran, so no
odd limits being hit in there.
Setting a lower (4MB) stack limit, and then increasing the
amount of args in 100K steps I saw this:
Up to an including 32 * 100K => works fine.
33:40 * 100K => no errors from the script, but wc reports "0 0 0"
>40 * 100K => "/bin/echo: Argument list too long".
All this might be connected to ia64's confusing implementation
of stack limit (since we have *two* stacks ... the regular one
and the upward growing one for the h/w register stack engine).
Ah ... running the 34*100K case direct from my shell prompt, I
do see a "Killed" that must get lost when I run this in the
shell script loop.
-Tony
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists