On 31/08/16 14:22 +0300, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
On Apr 5, 2016, at 2:20 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
This patch fixes an obscure cross-testing problem that crashed (OOMed) our
boards at Linaro. Several tests in libstdc++ (e.g., [1]) limit themselves to
some reasonable amount of RAM and then tr
> On Apr 5, 2016, at 2:20 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
>> This patch fixes an obscure cross-testing problem that crashed (OOMed) our
>> boards at Linaro. Several tests in libstdc++ (e.g., [1]) limit themselves
>> to some reasonable amount of RAM and then try to allocate 32 gigs.
>> Unfortuna
This patch fixes an obscure cross-testing problem that crashed (OOMed) our
boards at Linaro. Several tests in libstdc++ (e.g., [1]) limit themselves to
some reasonable amount of RAM and then try to allocate 32 gigs. Unfortunately,
the configure test that checks presence of setrlimit is rather
On 02/03/16 09:38 -0800, Mike Stump wrote:
On Mar 2, 2016, at 2:08 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
PING ^ 2. The patch is sitting without comments for 4+ months.
So the libstdc++ people are usually pretty active and responsive, I usually let
them review these sorts of patches as domain experts.
On Mar 2, 2016, at 2:08 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
> PING ^ 2. The patch is sitting without comments for 4+ months.
So the libstdc++ people are usually pretty active and responsive, I usually let
them review these sorts of patches as domain experts. I only kick in if they
are unreasonably abse
PING ^ 2. The patch is sitting without comments for 4+ months.
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org
> On Dec 10, 2015, at 4:47 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>
>> On Nov 11, 2015, at 7:56 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> This patch fixes an obscure cross-testing problem that crashed (
> On Nov 11, 2015, at 7:56 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> This patch fixes an obscure cross-testing problem that crashed (OOMed) our
> boards at Linaro. Several tests in libstdc++ (e.g., [1]) limit themselves to
> some reasonable amount of RAM and then try to allocate 32 gigs.
> Unfo
