Re: [RFC 6/7] mm: extend process_madvise syscall to support vector arrary
From: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Date: 2019-05-21 10:26:21
Also in:
linux-mm, lkml
On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 08:24:21AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Tue 21-05-19 11:48:20, Minchan Kim wrote:quoted
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 11:22:58AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:quoted
[Cc linux-api] On Mon 20-05-19 12:52:53, Minchan Kim wrote:quoted
Currently, process_madvise syscall works for only one address range so user should call the syscall several times to give hints to multiple address range.Is that a problem? How big of a problem? Any numbers?We easily have 2000+ vma so it's not trivial overhead. I will come up with number in the description at respin.Does this really have to be a fast operation? I would expect the monitor is by no means a fast path. The system call overhead is not what it used to be, sigh, but still for something that is not a hot path it should be tolerable, especially when the whole operation is quite expensive on its own (wrt. the syscall entry/exit).
What's different with process_vm_[readv|writev] and vmsplice? If the range needed to be covered is a lot, vector operation makes senese to me.
I am not saying we do not need a multiplexing API, I am just not sure we need it right away. Btw. there was some demand for other MM syscalls to provide a multiplexing API (e.g. mprotect), maybe it would be better to handle those in one go?
That's the exactly what Daniel Colascione suggested from internal review. That would be a interesting approach if we could aggregate all of system call in one go.
-- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs