Re: missing madvise functionality

[Nick Piggin]

Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Apr 2007 18:55:18 +1000
> Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> > Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 2007-04-04 at 12:22 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > > I do think such workloads might benefit from a vma_cache not shared by 
> > > > > all threads but private to each thread. A sequence could invalidate the 
> > > > > cache(s).
> > > > >
> > > > > ie instead of a mm->mmap_cache, having a mm->sequence, and each thread 
> > > > > having a current->mmap_cache and current->mm_sequence
> > > >
> > > > I have a patchset to do exactly this, btw.
> > >
> > >
> > > /me too
> > >
> > > However, I decided against pushing it because when it does happen that a
> > > task is not involved with a vma lookup for longer than it takes the seq
> > > count to wrap we have a stale pointer...
> > >
> > > We could go and walk the tasks once in a while to reset the pointer, but
> > > it all got a tad involved.
> >
> > Well here is my core patch (against I think 2.6.16 + a set of vma cache
> > cleanups and abstractions). I didn't think the wrapping aspect was
> > terribly involved.
>
>
> Well, I believe this one is too expensive. I was thinking of a light one :
>
> I am not deleting mmap_sem, but adding a sequence number to mm_struct, that is incremented each time a vma is added/deleted, not each time mmap_sem is taken (read or write)

That's exactly what mine does (except IIRC it doesn't invalidate when
you add a vma).


> Each thread has its own copy of the sequence, taken at the time find_vma() had to do a full lookup.
>
> I believe some optimized paths could call check_vma_cache() without mmap_sem read lock taken, and if it fails, take the mmap_sem lock and do the slow path.

The mmap_sem for read does not only protect the mm_rb rbtree structure, but
the vmas themselves as well as their page tables, so you can't do that.

You could do it if you had a lock-per-vma to synchronise against write
operations, and rcu-freed vmas or some such... but I don't think we should
go down a road like that until we first remove mmap_sem from low hanging
things (like private futexes!) and then see who's complaining.

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