Re: Note describing poor dcache utilization under high memory pressure

From: Rick Stevens (rstevens@vitalstream.com)
Date: Mon Jan 28 2002 - 16:33:14 EST


Daniel Phillips wrote:
[snip]

> I've been a little slow to 'publish' this on lkml because I wanted a working
> prototype first, as proof of concept. My efforts to dragoon one or more of
> the notably capable kernelnewbies crowd into coding it haven't been
> particularly successful, perhaps due to the opacity of the code in question
> (pgtable.h et al). So I've begun coding it myself, and it's rather slow
> going, again because of the opacity of the code. Oh, and the difficult
> nature of the problem itself, since it requires understanding pretty much all
> of Unix memory management semantics first, including the bizarre (and useful)
> properties of process forking.
>
> The good news is, the code changes required do fit very cleanly into the
> current design. Changes are required in three places I've identified so far:
>
> copy_page_range
> Intead of copying the page tables, just increment their use counts
>
> zap_page_range:
> If a page table is shared according to its use count, just decrement
> the use count and otherwise leave it alone.
>
> handle_mm_fault:
> If a page table is shared according to its use count and the faulting
> instruction is a write, allocate a new page table and do the work that
> would have normally been done by copy_page_range at fork time.
> Decrement the use count of the (perhaps formerly) shared page table.

Perhaps I'm missing this, but I read that as the child gets a reference
to the parent's memory. If the child attempts a write, then new memory
is allocated, data copied and the write occurs to this new memory. As
I read this, it's only invoked on a child write.

Would this not leave a hole where the parent could write and, since the
child shares that memory, the new data would be read by the child? Sort
of a hidden shm segment? If so, I think we've got problems brewing.
Now, if a parent write causes the same behaviour as a child write, then
my point is moot.

Could you clarify this for me? I'm probably way off base here.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, SSE, VitalStream, Inc. rstevens@vitalstream.com -
- 949-743-2010 (Voice) http://www.vitalstream.com -
- -
- grep me no patterns and I'll tell you no lines -
----------------------------------------------------------------------

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 31 2002 - 21:00:54 EST