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
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
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
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
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