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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox