Re: [uClinux-dev] ls: can't open '.': Cannot allocate memory

2012-10-30 Thread Luis Alves
Hi Greg, What you are seeing though is a classic case of memory fragmentation. Thats true. If I spam a lot of 'ls' with other commands between, it eventually works. (I guess at some point a memory chunk of 1024k becomes available). I've tried to rebuild the kernel using as memory allocator

Re: [uClinux-dev] ls: can't open '.': Cannot allocate memory

2012-10-30 Thread Greg Ungerer
Hi Luis, On 10/30/2012 08:38 PM, Luis Alves wrote: What you are seeing though is a classic case of memory fragmentation. Thats true. If I spam a lot of 'ls' with other commands between, it eventually works. (I guess at some point a memory chunk of 1024k becomes available). I've tried to

Re: [uClinux-dev] ls: can't open '.': Cannot allocate memory

2012-10-30 Thread Larry Baker
Greg, Hi Luis, On 10/30/2012 08:38 PM, Luis Alves wrote: What you are seeing though is a classic case of memory fragmentation. Thats true. If I spam a lot of 'ls' with other commands between, it eventually works. (I guess at some point a memory chunk of 1024k becomes available). I've

Re: [uClinux-dev] ls: can't open '.': Cannot allocate memory

2012-10-30 Thread Larry Baker
On 30 Oct 2012, at 3:04 PM, Gavin Lambert wrote: Quoth Larry Baker: I've tried those solutions too -- no good. I decided that was because those are kernel memory allocation policies, and have no effect on user memory allocation. Is that correct? Not entirely. User-mode malloc

Re: [uClinux-dev] ls: can't open '.': Cannot allocate memory

2012-10-30 Thread Greg Ungerer
Hi Larry, On 31/10/12 03:39, Larry Baker wrote: On 10/30/2012 08:38 PM, Luis Alves wrote: What you are seeing though is a classic case of memory fragmentation. Thats true. If I spam a lot of 'ls' with other commands between, it eventually works. (I guess at some point a memory chunk of 1024k