Thread (13 messages) 13 messages, 3 authors, 2019-05-30

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
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help