This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: cc1plus invoked oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x280da, order=0, oom_adj=0

From: "Justin P. Mattock" <justinmattock at gmail dot com>
To: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby at gmail dot com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2009 16:56:47 -0800
Subject: Re: cc1plus invoked oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x280da, order=0, oom_adj=0
References: <dd18b0c30911021329g3c99a783n6b0a293240c3312c@mail.gmail.com> <4AEF53F5.4020107@gmail.com> <dd18b0c30911021402t6c8b9cd4p2e5d5dcad732d0ac@mail.gmail.com> <4AEF57AC.4090704@gmail.com>

Jiri Slaby wrote:

On 11/02/2009 11:02 PM, Justin Mattock wrote:
Now with this oom-killer I'm hitting this on an imac9,1 with gcc (GCC) 4.5.0 20091029 (experimental)
So there is probably a leak in the gcc chain. Does this happen with a
stable gcc version?

o.k. I think it's something with the latest gcc(snapshot)
right now she's been compiling firefox for 45min
(then crapped out because I compiled nss without sqlite)
without no omm-killer.

Justin P. Mattock

References:
- cc1plus invoked oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x280da, order=0, oom_adj=0
  - From: Justin Mattock
- Re: cc1plus invoked oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x280da, order=0, oom_adj=0
  - From: Jiri Slaby
- Re: cc1plus invoked oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x280da, order=0, oom_adj=0
  - From: Justin Mattock
- Re: cc1plus invoked oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x280da, order=0, oom_adj=0
  - From: Jiri Slaby

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]