Re: gcc behavior on memory exhaustion

2017-08-16 Thread Martin Liška
Hello. Just small note, link to Nathan's patch that has been recently accepted: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-08/msg00878.html Which provides info about process termination. Martin

Re: gcc behavior on memory exhaustion (bug 81818)

2017-08-13 Thread Andrew Roberts
I've updated this bug [Bug 81818 - aarch64 uses 2-3x memory and 2x time of arm at -Os, -O2, -O3] with more info. It looks to be that on ARM systems with limited RAM optimizations are being skipped, but not on AARCH64. Is there a way I can check this is true? I checked all the optimizations

Re: gcc behavior on memory exhaustion

2017-08-11 Thread Andrew Roberts
On 10/08/17 10:22, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: If you think gcc is using an unreasonable amount of memory for a particular bit of code then please file a bug report, with pre-processed source code (don't assume that because the sources are part of gcc we can reproduce your setup). You

Re: gcc behavior on memory exhaustion

2017-08-11 Thread Andreas Schwab
On Aug 11 2017, Andrew Roberts wrote: > Meanwhile, I'm testing memory usage and compile times with my code on gcc > 5.4.0, 6.4.0, 7.2.0 and 8.0.0, across x64, arm and aarch64. Make sure you compile them all with the same checking options. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab,

Re: gcc behavior on memory exhaustion

2017-08-10 Thread Florian Weimer
* Pedro Alves: >> The siginfo_t information should indicate that the signal originated >> from the kernel. > > OOC, where? While a parent process can use "waitid" to get > a siginfo_t with information about the child exit, that siginfo_t > is not the same siginfo_t a signal handler would get

Re: gcc behavior on memory exhaustion

2017-08-10 Thread Andrew Roberts
On 11/08/17 02:09, Pedro Alves wrote: Meanwhile, maybe just having the driver check for SIGKILL and enumerate likely causes would be better than the status quo. Pedro Alves I agree, having some indication it MIGHT be out of memory would stop people wasting a lot of time, and avoid spurious

Re: gcc behavior on memory exhaustion

2017-08-10 Thread Pedro Alves
On 08/10/2017 10:22 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Andrew Haley: > >> On 09/08/17 14:05, Andrew Roberts wrote: >>> 2) It would be nice to see some sort of out of memory error, rather than >>> just an ICE. >> >> There's nothing we can do: the kernel killed us. We can't emit any >> message before

Re: gcc behavior on memory exhaustion

2017-08-10 Thread Florian Weimer
* Andrew Haley: > On 09/08/17 14:05, Andrew Roberts wrote: >> 2) It would be nice to see some sort of out of memory error, rather than >> just an ICE. > > There's nothing we can do: the kernel killed us. We can't emit any > message before we die. (killed) tells you that we were killed, but >

Re: gcc behavior on memory exhaustion

2017-08-10 Thread Yuri Gribov
On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 3:14 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote: > On Aug 09 2017, Yuri Gribov wrote: > >> On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 2:49 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: >>> On 09/08/17 14:05, Andrew Roberts wrote: 2) It would be nice to see some sort of out

Re: gcc behavior on memory exhaustion

2017-08-10 Thread Richard Earnshaw (lists)
On 09/08/17 14:05, Andrew Roberts wrote: > I routinely build the weekly snapshots and RC's, on x64, arm and aarch64. > > The last gcc 8 snapshot and the two recent 7.2 RC's have failed to build > on aarch64 (Raspberry Pi 3, running Arch Linux ARM). I have finally > traced this to the system

Re: gcc behavior on memory exhaustion

2017-08-09 Thread Andreas Schwab
On Aug 09 2017, Yuri Gribov wrote: > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 2:49 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: >> On 09/08/17 14:05, Andrew Roberts wrote: >>> 2) It would be nice to see some sort of out of memory error, rather than >>> just an ICE. >> >> There's nothing we can

Re: gcc behavior on memory exhaustion

2017-08-09 Thread Yuri Gribov
On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 2:49 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: > On 09/08/17 14:05, Andrew Roberts wrote: >> 2) It would be nice to see some sort of out of memory error, rather than >> just an ICE. > > There's nothing we can do: the kernel killed us. We can't emit any > message before we

Re: gcc behavior on memory exhaustion

2017-08-09 Thread Andrew Roberts
On 09/08/17 14:05, Andrew Roberts wrote: I routinely build the weekly snapshots and RC's, on x64, arm and aarch64. The last gcc 8 snapshot and the two recent 7.2 RC's have failed to build on aarch64 (Raspberry Pi 3, running Arch Linux ARM). I have finally traced this to the system running out

Re: gcc behavior on memory exhaustion

2017-08-09 Thread Andrew Haley
On 09/08/17 14:05, Andrew Roberts wrote: > 2) It would be nice to see some sort of out of memory error, rather than > just an ICE. There's nothing we can do: the kernel killed us. We can't emit any message before we die. (killed) tells you that we were killed, but we don't know who done it.

Re: gcc behavior on memory exhaustion

2017-08-09 Thread Markus Trippelsdorf
On 2017.08.09 at 14:05 +0100, Andrew Roberts wrote: > I routinely build the weekly snapshots and RC's, on x64, arm and aarch64. > > The last gcc 8 snapshot and the two recent 7.2 RC's have failed to build on > aarch64 (Raspberry Pi 3, running Arch Linux ARM). I have finally traced this > to the

gcc behavior on memory exhaustion

2017-08-09 Thread Andrew Roberts
I routinely build the weekly snapshots and RC's, on x64, arm and aarch64. The last gcc 8 snapshot and the two recent 7.2 RC's have failed to build on aarch64 (Raspberry Pi 3, running Arch Linux ARM). I have finally traced this to the system running out of memory. I guess a recent kernel