On Apr 19, 2007, at 8:18 PM, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 11:47:55AM -0700, Andy Dougherty wrote:# New Ticket Created by Andy Dougherty # Please include the string: [perl #42620] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # <URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=42620 > Both t/compilers/pge/p5regex/p5rx.t and t/compilers/pge/p6regex/01-regex.t are failing with the following error message: t/compilers/pge/p5regex/p5rx.............Parrot VM: PANIC: Out of mem! C file src/gc/memory.c, line 97 Parrot file (not available), line (not available)I believe that both of these tests are currently being run with the -G flag, which should mean that Parrot is not doing any garbage collection: $ head -2 t/compilers/pge/p5regex/p5rx.t #!./parrot -G # Copyright (C) 2001-2006, The Perl Foundation. $ head -2 t/compilers/pge/p6regex/01-regex.t #!./parrot -G # Copyright (C) 2001-2007, The Perl Foundation. Given the number of tests that run, I'm not too surprised that they run out of memory when -G is present. This does prompt the question of removing -G from the tests, but the last time I looked into doing this (about a month ago) Parrot still had intermittent GC errors that would cause random failures in the tests. After a lot of discussion on the mailing list and in #parrot I think it was decided that running the tests with -G was preferable to having random test failures showing up in the pge tests due to GC problems in Parrot. Hope this helps, and thanks for the report! (Should we close this ticket?) Pm
Actually I believe it was mixed, it should be -G for releases, but be garbage collected on development. Developers will always have a harder time fixing bugs if they can't reproduce them, and hiding a bug in the core that pge exposes isn't good for discovering them. The attached patch might do the right thing, but I'm not positive.
pge-gc.patch
Description: Binary data
