From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#18995: Error: Could not reserve dynamic heap area. Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2014 19:17:47 +0200 Message-ID: <83zjc0nvic.fsf@gnu.org> References: <834mu9r47v.fsf@gnu.org> <83y4rlpmsr.fsf@gnu.org> <83wq75plkm.fsf@gnu.org> <83vbmppj4a.fsf@gnu.org> <83r3xdpiex.fsf@gnu.org> <545E81BD.8070904@dancol.org> <83egtcpd3z.fsf@gnu.org> <87r3xcqqlp.fsf@igel.home> <83389spbdj.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1415553564 11393 80.91.229.3 (9 Nov 2014 17:19:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2014 17:19:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 18995@debbugs.gnu.org, schwab@linux-m68k.org To: Alexander Shukaev Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Nov 09 18:19:16 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XnW8y-0003I3-3k for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 09 Nov 2014 18:19:16 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39486 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XnW8x-00037p-Kc for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 09 Nov 2014 12:19:15 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59374) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XnW8p-0002zg-7C for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 09 Nov 2014 12:19:12 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XnW8k-0006Zh-6g for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 09 Nov 2014 12:19:07 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:57825) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XnW8k-0006Zd-3g for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 09 Nov 2014 12:19:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XnW8j-0003qD-TJ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 09 Nov 2014 12:19:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2014 17:19:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 18995 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 18995-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B18995.141555348314690 (code B ref 18995); Sun, 09 Nov 2014 17:19:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 18995) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Nov 2014 17:18:03 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55038 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XnW7n-0003os-4f for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 09 Nov 2014 12:18:03 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout29.012.net.il ([80.179.55.185]:42024) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XnW7l-0003oS-4R for 18995@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 09 Nov 2014 12:18:01 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout29.012.net.il by mtaout29.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NES00E007XTMZ00@mtaout29.012.net.il> for 18995@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 09 Nov 2014 19:16:23 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by mtaout29.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NES00C5M7ZAM420@mtaout29.012.net.il>; Sun, 09 Nov 2014 19:16:23 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:95782 > Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2014 17:53:25 +0100 > From: Alexander Shukaev > Cc: 18995@debbugs.gnu.org, dancol@dancol.org, schwab@linux-m68k.org > > Sheer luck: the first call to VirtualAlloc succeeds because it asks > for an amount that is much smaller than the 64-bit address space. > > > 32 GB is not that small. I have only 8 GB on my current car... (It's 256GB, not 32: the comment was wrong.) That call only _reserves_ the address space, it doesn't actually allocate anything. So the amount of memory actually available on your system is not important at that spot. What _is_ important is that in the 32-bit executable we are trying to reserve a significant portion of the 2GB address space of 32-bit programs, while in the 64-bit executable we reserve a very small portion of the address space.