This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: cc1plus invoked oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x280da, order=0, oom_adj=0
Justin Mattock wrote:
> here's what I did:
> valgrind --tool=memcheck --leak-check=full -v make -f client.mk build
> ==4072== LEAK SUMMARY:
> I'll try out gdb, and more of valgrind.
Yep, that doesn't tell us a lot in its default modes. I'm not a valgrind
expert but it looks from the docs like you want to try the Massif tool: it
looks really thorough.
http://valgrind.org/docs/manual/ms-manual.html
cheers,
DaveK
- References:
- cc1plus invoked oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x280da, order=0, oom_adj=0
- Re: cc1plus invoked oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x280da, order=0, oom_adj=0
- Re: cc1plus invoked oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x280da, order=0, oom_adj=0
- Re: cc1plus invoked oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x280da, order=0, oom_adj=0
- Re: cc1plus invoked oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x280da, order=0, oom_adj=0
- Re: cc1plus invoked oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x280da, order=0, oom_adj=0
- Re: cc1plus invoked oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x280da, order=0, oom_adj=0
- Re: cc1plus invoked oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x280da, order=0, oom_adj=0
- Re: cc1plus invoked oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x280da, order=0, oom_adj=0