The test failure is harmless, but I'll change the test to allocate an 
additional maximal object if the first one succeeds; two objects each more than 
half the virtual address space cannot possibly coexist, so the second 
allocation must OOM.

Thanks,
Jason

> On Sep 22, 2015, at 6:02 AM, Ingvar Hagelund <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> build check of jemalloc-4.0.2 fails on i686, on RHEL, (el5 and el6
> fails, el7 does not have i386) and fedora up to f22.
> 
> === test/integration/mallocx ===
> test_oom:test/integration/mallocx.c:57: Failed assertion:
> (mallocx(hugemax, 0)) == (NULL) --> 0x17000000 != 0x0: Expected OOM for
> mallocx(size=0xe0000000, 0)
> test_oom: fail
> 
> Example build check fail (they all fail on the same check):
> 
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/7068/11177068/build.log
> 
> Note that on f23/i686, the build check completes without the assertion
> error.
> 
> Ingvar
> 
> 
> Den 21. sep. 2015 21:03, skrev Jason Evans:
>> jemalloc 4.0.2 is now available.  This bugfix release addresses a few bugs 
>> specific to heap profiling.
>> 
>> Bug fixes:
>> - Fix ixallocx_prof_sample() to never modify nor create sampled small 
>> allocations. xallocx() is in general incapable of moving small allocations, 
>> so this fix removes buggy code without loss of generality.
>> - Fix irallocx_prof_sample() to always allocate large regions, even when 
>> alignment is non-zero.
>> - Fix prof_alloc_rollback() to read tdata from thread-specific data rather 
>> than dereferencing a potentially invalid tctx.
>> 
>> For the complete ChangeLog, see:
>>      https://github.com/jemalloc/jemalloc/raw/4.0.2/ChangeLog
>> 
>> Direct download:
>>      
>> https://github.com/jemalloc/jemalloc/releases/download/4.0.2/jemalloc-4.0.2.tar.bz2
>> 
>> Starting point for general information:
>>      http://www.canonware.com/jemalloc/
>> 
>> Browsable revision history:
>>      https://github.com/jemalloc/jemalloc/tree/4.0.2
>> _______________________________________________
>> jemalloc-announce mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://www.canonware.com/mailman/listinfo/jemalloc-announce
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> jemalloc-discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.canonware.com/mailman/listinfo/jemalloc-discuss
> 

_______________________________________________
jemalloc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.canonware.com/mailman/listinfo/jemalloc-discuss

Reply via email to