Egor Pasko wrote:
On the 0x223 day of Apache Harmony Geir Magnusson, Jr. wrote:
Gregory Shimansky wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Gregory Shimansky wrote:
-Xss is the lower stack limit, it doesn't specify the maximum
stack size, doesn't it?
What does "lower stack limit" mean? :) I think that it's the size
of the stack, max.
I thought it is a starting stack size, like -Xms for heap size. Now
that I searched the web it appears that it is the maximum indeed.
"0" is minimum stack size.
I think all you need to do then is set the stack size :
ulimit -s 8192
or something. We should probably do this before each run on linux
so that things are well defined and reproducible.
I think 64-bit SuSE9 is just the only weird distribution which
doesn't have this limit. In 10th version they fixed this. So ulimit
-s is not necessary in most cases.
But harmless. And it makes the test predicable across platforms. and
if the StackSize test is forked, we can make it small to make it
quick...
I know nothing about forking Java processes. Does it make sense?
Secondly, fork() is fast regardless of the stack size (stacks are COW).
I'm not sure I meant that as a literal fork, but rather a spawned
process in which we can set the ulimit indep of the invoking parent.
I'd still like to have a recursion limit in StackTest but Rana has
convinced me that no SOE shouldn't mean that test has failed. I'll
patch it now.
I agree that your fix is utterly bogus :) but we want to test SOE
machinery, so I think that we should set the ulimit to ensure an
environment in which the SOE will happen if DRLVM is working
right. Therefore, we need to set things up such that not getting an
SOE is indeed a failure.
What a user would most likely expect on a system with no stack limit?
Something like on the other systems with stack limit as in
run-anywhere concept. And that would be SOE, not swapping. So, let's
limit the stack by, say, 10M if not set with an option. We can
implement the option later.
I think that it's totally unreasonable to have no upper bound on stack
size. A Java virtual machine should never be able to hose a machine by
sucking in all memory...
geir
