linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jon Pry <jonpry@gmail.com>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Jon Pry <jonpry@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2] userfaultfd: Add feature to request for a signal delivery
Date: Fri,  7 Jul 2017 16:21:07 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170707202107.21461-1-jonpry@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170706120949.GE9625@rapoport-lnx>

>On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 05:41:14PM -0700, prakash.sangappa wrote:
>> On 07/04/2017 11:28 AM, Mike Rapoport wrote:
>> >On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 09:08:40AM -0700, Prakash Sangappa wrote:
>> >>Applications like the database use hugetlbfs for performance reason.
>> >>Files on hugetlbfs filesystem are created and huge pages allocated
>> >>using fallocate() API. Pages are deallocated/freed using fallocate() hole
>> >>punching support. These files are mmap'ed and accessed by many
>> >>single threaded processes as shared memory.  The database keeps
>> >>track of which offsets in the hugetlbfs file have pages allocated.
>> >>

[ ... ]

>> >I think that it maybe worth making UFFD_FEATURE_SIGBUS mutually exclusive
>> >with the non-cooperative events. There is no point of having monitor if the
>> >page fault handler will anyway just kill the faulting process.
>> 
>> 
>> Will this not be too restrictive?. The non-cooperative events could
>> still be useful if an application wants to track changes
>> to VA ranges that are registered even though it expects
>> a signal on page fault.

>I wouldn't say that we must make UFFD_FEATURE_SIGBUS mutually exclusive
>with other events, but, IMHO, it's something we should at least think
>about.

>In my view, if you anyway have uffd monitor, you may process page faults
>there as well and then there is no actual need in UFFD_FEATURE_SIGBUS.

A use case for this I am considering, is lightweight threads/continuations 
having a context switch on the page faults of file backed VMA's. Some sort
of asynchronous read() would then be initiated. For this case, the primary
function of SIGBUS is to allow the thread to jump into context switch code.

While it's not immediately clear what roll the uffd monitor thread would play
in this. One can imagine the possibility of the UFFD thread also managing 
asynchronous i/o.

Just wanted to voice my approval of this patch in general. It could enable
some really cool userland technologies imho. 

~Jon Pry  

      reply	other threads:[~2017-07-07 20:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <ff16daf5-7ba0-3dc2-7f73-eb7db8336df7@oracle.com>
2017-07-04 18:28 ` [RFC PATCH v2] userfaultfd: Add feature to request for a signal delivery Mike Rapoport
2017-07-06  0:41   ` prakash.sangappa
2017-07-06 12:09     ` Mike Rapoport
2017-07-07 20:21       ` Jon Pry [this message]

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=20170707202107.21461-1-jonpry@gmail.com \
    --to=jonpry@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).