From: Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>
To: Joel Savitz <jsavitz@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@kernel.org>,
Kristina Martsenko <kristina.martsenko@arm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@embeddedor.com>,
YueHaibing <yuehaibing@huawei.com>,
Micah Morton <mortonm@chromium.org>,
Yang Shi <yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com>,
Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
Rafael Aquini <aquini@redhat.com>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>,
David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] sys/prctl: expose TASK_SIZE value to userspace
Date: Fri, 3 May 2019 13:49:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190503204912.GA5887@yury-thinkpad> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1556907021-29730-1-git-send-email-jsavitz@redhat.com>
On Fri, May 03, 2019 at 02:10:19PM -0400, Joel Savitz wrote:
> In the mainline kernel, there is no quick mechanism to get the virtual
> memory size of the current process from userspace.
>
> Despite the current state of affairs, this information is available to the
> user through several means, one being a linear search of the entire address
> space. This is an inefficient use of cpu cycles.
>
> A component of the libhugetlb kernel test does exactly this, and as
> systems' address spaces increase beyond 32-bits, this method becomes
> exceedingly tedious.
>
> For example, on a ppc64le system with a 47-bit address space, the linear
> search causes the test to hang for some unknown amount of time. I
> couldn't give you an exact number because I just ran it for about 10-20
> minutes and went to go do something else, probably to get coffee or
> something, and when I came back, I just killed the test and patched it
> to use this new mechanism. I re-ran my new version of the test using a
> kernel with this patch, and of course it passed through the previously
> bottlenecking codepath nearly instantaneously.
>
> As such, I propose that the prctl syscall be extended to include the
> option to retrieve TASK_SIZE from the kernel.
>
> This patch will allow us to upgrade an O(n) codepath to O(1) in an
> architecture-independent manner, and provide a mechanism for future
> generations to do the same.
So the only reason for the new API is boosting some random poorly
written userspace test? Why don't you introduce binary search instead?
Look at /proc/<pid>/maps. It may help to reduce the memory area to be
checked.
> Changes from v2:
> We now account for the case of 32-bit compat userspace on a 64-bit kernel
> More detail about the nature of TASK_SIZE in documentation
>
> Joel Savitz(2):
> sys/prctl: add PR_GET_TASK_SIZE option to prctl(2)
> prctl.2: Document the new PR_GET_TASK_SIZE option
>
> include/uapi/linux/prctl.h | 3 +++
> kernel/sys.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+)
>
> man2/prctl.2 | 10 ++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> --
> 2.18.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-03 20:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-03 18:10 [PATCH v3 0/2] sys/prctl: expose TASK_SIZE value to userspace Joel Savitz
2019-05-03 18:10 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] kernel/sys: add PR_GET_TASK_SIZE option to prctl(2) Joel Savitz
2019-05-03 21:08 ` Yury Norov
2019-05-03 21:51 ` Rafael Aquini
2019-05-03 22:14 ` Rafael Aquini
2019-05-03 23:15 ` Jann Horn
2019-05-04 6:56 ` Alexey Dobriyan
2019-05-03 18:10 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] prctl.2: Document the new PR_GET_TASK_SIZE option Joel Savitz
2019-05-03 20:49 ` Yury Norov [this message]
2019-05-03 21:57 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] sys/prctl: expose TASK_SIZE value to userspace Rafael Aquini
2019-05-04 4:21 ` Yury Norov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190503204912.GA5887@yury-thinkpad \
--to=yury.norov@gmail.com \
--cc=David.Laight@aculab.com \
--cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aquini@redhat.com \
--cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=gustavo@embeddedor.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=jsavitz@redhat.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kristina.martsenko@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mchehab+samsung@kernel.org \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mortonm@chromium.org \
--cc=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=yuehaibing@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.