This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [RFC] Patch: RAM-based heuristics for ggc-min-heapsize and ggc-min-expand
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>
- To: <Richard dot Earnshaw at arm dot com>
- Cc: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>, "Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu>, <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 19:08:44 +0000 (GMT)
- Subject: Re: [RFC] Patch: RAM-based heuristics for ggc-min-heapsize and ggc-min-expand
On Sat, 15 Feb 2003, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> > It doesn't make sense for us to try to consider RLIMIT_DATA etc, since
> > we don't have enough control to guarantee that we don't go over those.
> >
>
> RLIMIT_DATA would be completely wrong anyway. That's the maximum virtual
> data size (including swapped out data). If the compiler exceeds that then
> it's just going to get killed by the OS.
But you shouldn't treat the rlimits as saying you should use up to that
amount of memory anyway; you should take a *fraction* of the smallest
rlimit (just as you take a fraction of the physical memory). They are
likely to be set as sanity checks to prevent one user killing the machine
for others by accident, not to indicate that using up to the rlimit
routinely is sensible.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jsm28@cam.ac.uk