Re: [RFC PATCH 00/13] Introduce first class virtual address spaces
From: Chris Metcalf <hidden>
Date: 2017-03-14 19:53:44
Also in:
linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, linuxppc-dev
On 3/14/2017 12:12 PM, Till Smejkal wrote:
On Mon, 13 Mar 2017, Andy Lutomirski wrote:quoted
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 7:07 PM, Till Smejkal [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Mon, 13 Mar 2017, Andy Lutomirski wrote:quoted
This sounds rather complicated. Getting TLB flushing right seems tricky. Why not just map the same thing into multiple mms?This is exactly what happens at the end. The memory region that is described by the VAS segment will be mapped in the ASes that use the segment.So why is this kernel feature better than just doing MAP_SHARED manually in userspace?One advantage of VAS segments is that they can be globally queried by user programs which means that VAS segments can be shared by applications that not necessarily have to be related. If I am not mistaken, MAP_SHARED of pure in memory data will only work if the tasks that share the memory region are related (aka. have a common parent that initialized the shared mapping). Otherwise, the shared mapping have to be backed by a file.
True, but why is this bad? The shared mapping will be memory resident regardless, even if backed by a file (unless swapped out under heavy memory pressure, but arguably that's a feature anyway). More importantly, having a file name is a simple and consistent way of identifying such shared memory segments. With a little work, you can also arrange to map such files into memory at a fixed address in all participating processes, thus making internal pointers work correctly.
VAS segments on the other side allow sharing of pure in memory data by arbitrary related tasks without the need of a file. This becomes especially interesting if one combines VAS segments with non-volatile memory since one can keep data structures in the NVM and still be able to share them between multiple tasks.
I am not fully up to speed on NV/pmem stuff, but isn't that exactly what the DAX mode is supposed to allow you to do? If so, isn't sharing a mapped file on a DAX filesystem on top of pmem equivalent to what you're proposing? -- Chris Metcalf, Mellanox Technologies http://www.mellanox.com