On Fri 04-05-18 09:18:11, Prakash Sangappa wrote:
I thought you planned to expose address ranges for each numa node as
On 5/4/18 4:12 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Thu 03-05-18 15:39:49, prakash.sangappa wrote:Sure using move_pages, not based on just 'numa_maps'.
On 05/03/2018 11:03 AM, Christopher Lameter wrote:yes we have. See move_pages...
On Tue, 1 May 2018, Prakash Sangappa wrote:Don't think we can determine which numa node a given user process
For analysis purpose it is useful to have numa node informationCant you write a small script that scans the information in numa_maps and
corresponding mapped address ranges of the process. Currently
/proc/<pid>/numa_maps provides list of numa nodes from where pages are
allocated per VMA of the process. This is not useful if an user needs to
determine which numa node the mapped pages are allocated from for a
particular address range. It would have helped if the numa node information
presented in /proc/<pid>/numa_maps was broken down by VA ranges showing the
exact numa node from where the pages have been allocated.
then displays the total pages per NUMA node and then a list of which
ranges have how many pages on a particular node?
address range has pages from, based on the existing 'numa_maps' file.
Exposing numa node information itself should not break randomization right?Well, that breaks the layout randomization, doesn't it?No it is the opposite. A regular user should be able to determinereading this file will not be restricted(i.e requiring CAP_SYS_ADMIN).So a prime motivator here is security restricted access to numa_maps?
numa node information.
well. /me confused.
It would be upto the application. In case of randomization, the application... even more confused
could generateÂ address range traces of interest for debugging and then
using numa node information one could determine where the memory is laid
out for analysis.