Groups > linux.debian.bugs.dist > #1292269

Bug#1135720: acl2: FTBFS on loong64: Killed after 3 days of "Tick"

From	Santiago Vila <sanvila@debian.org>
Newsgroups	linux.debian.bugs.dist
Subject	Bug#1135720: acl2: FTBFS on loong64: Killed after 3 days of "Tick"
Date	2026-05-05 14:20 +0200
Message-ID	<MRmUN-2LPt-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<MRi4N-2IGg-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <MRmrL-2LnZ-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <MRi4N-2IGg-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <MRmrL-2LnZ-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Tue, May 05, 2026 at 01:41:29PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:

> I did not try a second time, but it looks like the same problem, which means
> this is not really loong64-specific and maybe you can also reproduce
> the problem more easily on amd64 using the GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX="nr_cpus=1" trick.

Nevermind. Maybe this is just trying to use more memory than available.

My single-cpu system had 16 GB of RAM and some swap. Monitoring Committed_AS
in /proc/meminfo tells me it was trying to allocate 18 GB of RAM.

On systems with 2 CPUs, I know that it tries to allocate 27 GB of RAM.

This is a problem not only for buildd.debian.org but also for anybody
trying to do QA. I see the package is blacklisted here:

https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/rb-pkg/unstable/amd64/acl2.html

I guess reproducible-builds people would definitely prefer not having to blacklist it.

Thanks.

Back to linux.debian.bugs.dist | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar

Thread

Bug#1135720: acl2: FTBFS on loong64: Killed after 3 days of "Tick" Sebastian Ramacher <sramacher@debian.org> - 2026-05-05 09:10 +0200
  Bug#1135720: acl2: FTBFS on loong64: Killed after 3 days of "Tick" Santiago Vila <sanvila@debian.org> - 2026-05-05 13:50 +0200
    Bug#1135720: acl2: FTBFS on loong64: Killed after 3 days of "Tick" Santiago Vila <sanvila@debian.org> - 2026-05-05 14:20 +0200

csiph-web