CVS 1.7.0 heap errors
Wed Jul 18 10:05:00 GMT 2007
On Jul 17 14:54, Brian Ford wrote:
> > > On Wed, 27 Jun 2007, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> I attained the following output from the attached patch:
> 7 [main] ? (4876) heap_init: baseAddr: 0x680000
> 171 [main] ? (4876) heap_init: allocBase: 0x670000
> 347 [main] ? (4876) heap_init: allocProt: 0x20
> 425 [main] ? (4876) heap_init: regionSize:0xA7000
> 502 [main] ? (4876) heap_init: state: 0x1000
> 614 [main] ? (4876) heap_init: protect: 0x20
> 693 [main] ? (4876) heap_init: type: 0x40000
> 778 [main] ? (4876) C:\cygwin\bin\make.exe: *** fatal error - couldn't allocate heap, Win32 error 487, base 0x680000, top 0x6B0000, reserve_size 192512, allocsize 196608, page_const 4096
> I know this isn't much to go on, but just in case...
Nothing to see...
> >, and perhaps why.
> I really wish I had more than a few minutes a week to spend on this :-(.
> Perhaps then I'll be able to figure it out.
> > You could also try to eliminate any change from
> > http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-cvs/2007-q1/msg00139.html which is not
> > related to your problem, so that only the exact change causing it is
> > highlighted. That might give us an idea, hopefully.
> You don't have any suggestions for how to best separate the patch into
> pieces do you?
Look into the ChangeLog for the patch. It can be divided into two
- Changing the cygheap->shared_prefix handling.
Affects cygheap.cc, fhandler_fifo.cc, posix_ipc.cc, shared.cc,
thread.cc, wincap.cc and wincap.h.
The changes to wincap.* are definitely non-critical. Also, hazarding
a wild guess, I assume that make (and none of the subsequent
processes) use FIFOs and POSIX IPC, so you can ignore the changes in
fhandler_fifo.cc and posix_ipc.cc.
- Changing the way the user privileges are set at process startup.
Affects dcrt0.cc, sec_helper.cc and security.h.
Stupidly glaring at this change, I'm wondering if this is the culprit.
The change itself looks quite harmless. But the non-obvious result
is that already very early in the process initialization functions from
advapi32 are called. OTOH, Cygwin is load-time linked against advapi32.
So that shouldn't have any negative effect. Hmm.
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
More information about the Cygwin