Oliver Stieber wrote:
Finally if you do NOT have a flex-mmap kernel, that
may also allow the
win32 heap to grow as much as necessary.
I've tried doing...
int i;
int j;
char* data;
for(i =0 ; i< 10 ; i++){
data = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(),0,64*1024*1024);
/*write to the data for linux really a
> Right, this is almost certainly a VMA layout issue.
> Try an
>
> echo 1 >/proc/sys/vm/legacy_va_layout
>
That's not there, (but my pc's a good 18 months old
VIA/AMD).
> and see if that makes any difference. Also try
> disabling execshield if
> present:
>
> echo 0 >/proc/sys/kernel/exec-shi
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 12:53:31 +, Mike Hearn wrote:
> Finally if you do NOT have a flex-mmap kernel, that may also allow the
> win32 heap to grow as much as necessary.
To clarify the flex-mmap patches should let us allocate a much larger
process heap, so you may wish to experiment with applying
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 15:58:30 -0600, Rob Shearman wrote:
> The most like answer is that there is so much fragmentation in your
> virtual address space that there is no block of contiguous memory free
> for whatever size is being passed into RtlCreateHeap. Inspecting
> /proc//maps will give you a
Oliver Stieber wrote:
Hi,
I been having a problem where HeapAlloc is failing
even though there's plenty of virtual memory left
I've done a bit of digging but haven't been able to
get to the bottom of it.
First of all I've checked that HeapAlloc will go into
swap by allocating a lot of 64meg blocks
Hi,
I been having a problem where HeapAlloc is failing
even though there's plenty of virtual memory left
I've done a bit of digging but haven't been able to
get to the bottom of it.
First of all I've checked that HeapAlloc will go into
swap by allocating a lot of 64meg blocks and writing
to them
