From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joey Hess Subject: Re: RLIMIT_NOFILE fallback Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 16:03:49 -0400 Message-ID: <20131218200349.GA14532@kitenet.net> References: <20131218171446.GA19657@kitenet.net> <20131218191702.GA9083@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="xHFwDpU9dbj6ez1V" Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Dec 18 21:04:03 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VtNLe-00034s-QB for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 21:04:03 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750961Ab3LRUD7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Dec 2013 15:03:59 -0500 Received: from wren.kitenet.net ([80.68.85.49]:51139 "EHLO kitenet.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750872Ab3LRUD6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Dec 2013 15:03:58 -0500 Received: by darkstar.kitenet.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 500A9305EE8; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 15:03:49 -0500 (EST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20131218191702.GA9083@sigill.intra.peff.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: --xHFwDpU9dbj6ez1V Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Jeff King wrote: > I wish we understood why getrlimit was failing. Returning EFAULT seems > like an odd choice if it is not implemented for the system. On such a > system, do the other fallbacks actually work? Would it work to do: >=20 > That is, does sysconf actually work on such a system (or does it need a > similar run-time fallback)? And either way, we should try falling back > to OPEN_MAX rather than 1 if we have it. For what it's worth, the system this happened on was a QNAP TS-219PII Linux willow 2.6.33.2 #1 Fri Mar 1 04:41:48 CST 2013 armv5tel unknown I don't have access to it to run tests of sysconf. (I already suggested its owner upgrade its firmware.) > As far as the warning, I am not sure I see a point. The user does not > have any useful recourse, and git should continue to operate as normal. > Having every single git invocation print "by the way, RLIMIT_NOFILE does > not work on your system" seems like it would get annoying. I agree with that. --=20 see shy jo --xHFwDpU9dbj6ez1V Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (GNU/Linux) iQIVAwUBUrH/oskQ2SIlEuPHAQgpCBAApMPfgDv/q7kJa1jEyfljnSKPgTHoa4SQ TSBxnmJbuweoUBaVyur3lX4zGRHKKJGRoYBbqeq6Zx4G5wJZqFaNEXzzbR+Pfl/m 7d7yIh88WPVGOgrtqsQCq/NyFK2OBGHiVnvmAe+BPJROM8I4Fj6kwu7umn7BENt5 dplGuGgvO3dBEBx9DJcequtw+G8CKfB00OjCZK5tEOdWkkXSPnTzVXPP8ECp3CQ3 sIdTQ+pX4gU4KxyweFdoKSFxdi8Y7AIGUeAoPKkGN9rmapJCd6MZR6LDYcVdeJJD WGEEA1iTe9kMpcuuGQJlMt9Z3IesWy9GCUuhqxEywXZs/+wNkUjcuAvAnJFqzaCb S9bb6sJRLSd7fJfu1pK0oIZ9LxUtMLw9m6RZGnhIagd+SlKanciKvueWo0zRaCO1 oRyDLHV/+hs08PWxT2N4l1vQ4xhLcd5mbAD4vVfzmm+TRRYABW8OZnDbn9z0I5GB FgmuaJcwDki6EIIUBFUI9fyOPcn3Z7chiHk12fx102FAv+TrAAVGwY2D3oRw6aSt Utrsyp3Um1gfjvhxPbts1jPvxsfCojubwSvWGlXQFy7E4Z7r3EKPzsgPEJEP6BSO O7deiaaT1pt5D9S0CeOn4j/JEw3VHd9hu4aNH1ryaKnQt0iiHQuA6buu27svLFPK ysfKZ6iRfD4= =fbRu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --xHFwDpU9dbj6ez1V--