Re: [PATCH RFC] hugetlbfs 'noautofill' mount option
From: Prakash Sangappa
Date: Tue May 02 2017 - 19:34:58 EST
On 5/2/17 2:32 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
On 05/01/2017 11:00 AM, Prakash Sangappa wrote:
This patch adds a new hugetlbfs mount option 'noautofill', to indicate that
I think the main argument against doing something like this is further
pages should not be allocated at page fault time when accessed thru mmapped
specializing hugetlbfs. I was really hoping that userfaultfd would be
usable for your needs here.
Could you elaborate on other options that you considered? Did you look
at userfaultfd? What about an madvise() option that disallows backing
Yes, we did consider userfaultfd and madvise(). The use case in mind is
With a database, large number of single threaded processes are involved
will map hugetlbfs file and use it for shared memory. The concern with
userfaultfd is the overhead of setup and having an additional thread per
to monitor the userfaultfd. Even if the additional thread can be
avoided, by using
an external monitor process and each process sending the userfaultfd to
monitor process, setup overhead exists.
Similarly, a madvise() option also requires additional system call by every
process mapping the file, this is considered a overhead for the database.
If we do consider a new madvise() option, will it be acceptable since
this will be
specifically for hugetlbfs file mappings? If so, would a new flag to mmap()
call itself be acceptable, which would define the proposed behavior?.
no additional system calls need to be made. Again this mmap flag would be
applicable specifically to hugetlbfs file mappings
With the proposed mount option, it would enforce one consistent behavior
and the application using this filesystem would not have to take additional
steps as with userfaultfd or madvise().