From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: u-vpoa@aetey.se
Subject: Re: the memory model being used in elks?
Date: Sat, 9 May 2015 19:47:03 +0200
Message-ID: <20150509174703.GK8197@example.net>
References: <20150508201433.GJ8197@example.net>
 <20150509180333.507d7482@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Return-path: <linux-8086-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150509180333.507d7482@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Sender: linux-8086-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-8086.vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: ELKS <linux-8086@vger.kernel.org>

On Sat, May 09, 2015 at 06:03:33PM +0100, One Thousand Gnomes wrote:
> >  sys_brk failed: len 31368 > end_seg 30864
> >   ...
> > 
> > I assumed somehow a data segment with around 60K available,
> > is this not the case? 
> 
> Did you compile it with split I and D ? (-i)

Thanks for the suggestion.

I expected this to be the default, which corresponded to the report
from the elks "file" command (all files and "pres" too were reported as
split i/d). "File" might have been wrong though.

Now I also have rechecked the make logs and bcc documentation.
There was no "-i" flag at the build and the linker command was "bcc".

The man page states that the "-i" flag makes bcc to avoid passing "-i"
to the linker and would in that case lead to creation of an "impure
executable".

IOW, as much as I can see, the binary is built correctly and it is
the memory allocation by the kernel which looks surprizing.

I have tried building kernels both with and without the "advanced
memory manager", the resulting memory limitation looks the same.

Rl