Description of problem: When running maxima reads the physical memory value from /proc/meminfo, and then tries to mmap this amount of memory. If this memory cannot be allocated, the program then exits. maxima does not check getrlimit RLIMIT_DATA. This means if a data segment ulimit is in place, maxima always fails. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): maxima-5.19.2-1.fc12.x86_64 How reproducible: Every time. Steps to Reproduce: 1. Set a ulimit smaller than the size of physical ram $ ulimit -S -v 1048576 2. Run maxima $ maxima mmap: Cannot allocate memory ensure_space: failed to validate 8589869056 bytes at 0x1000000000 (hint: Try "ulimit -a"; maybe you should increase memory limits.) Actual results: maxima fails to run if there is data segment memory limit smaller than the physical memory on a machine. Expected results: maxima would read both the physical memory, and the current ulimit, and choose the smaller of the two values, and thereby be able to run. Additional info: If this bug were fixed, the memory usage could be properly limited and maxima would not be able to cause out of memory problems on a computer. Relevant portions of strace output: 23413 open("/proc/meminfo", O_RDONLY) = 3 23413 fstat(3, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0444, st_size=0, ...}) = 0 23413 mmap(NULL, 4096, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = 0x7f9f2a032000 23413 read(3, "MemTotal: 8196156 kB\nMemF"..., 1024) = 1024 23413 close(3) = 0 23413 mmap(NULL, 33554432, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = 0x7ffff01a3000 23413 mmap(0x20000000, 1044480, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE|PROT_EXEC, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS|MAP_NORESERVE, -1, 0) = 0x20000000 23413 mmap(0x20100000, 1044480, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE|PROT_EXEC, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS|MAP_NORESERVE, -1, 0) = 0x20100000 23413 mmap(0x1000000000, 8589869056, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE|PROT_EXEC, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS|MAP_NORESERVE, -1, 0) = -1 ENOMEM (Cannot allocate memory)
This seems to be the fault of the sbcl lisp compiler. I will have to track it down in that code.
(In reply to comment #0) > When running maxima reads the physical memory value from /proc/meminfo, and > then tries to mmap this amount of memory. That does not appear to be true. My machine has "MemTotal: 2056292 kB", but sbcl still tries to allocate 8 GiB. I think the open of /proc/meminfo is something unrelated in glibc because I see it also when stracing other programs.
This message is a reminder that Fedora 12 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 12. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '12'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 12's end of life. Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 12 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this bug to the applicable version. If you are unable to change the version, please add a comment here and someone will do it for you. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete. The process we are following is described here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
Cannot reproduce using maxima-runtime-sbcl-5.22.1-5.fc13.i686 sbcl-1.0.38-2.fc13.i686
confirmed problem (still) exists on x86_64
This message is a reminder that Fedora 13 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 13. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '13'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 13's end of life. Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 13 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this bug to the applicable version. If you are unable to change the version, please add a comment here and someone will do it for you. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete. The process we are following is described here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
Fedora 13 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2011-06-25. Fedora 13 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.