From: Vlastimil Babka

Sent: 22 September 2016 18:55

...

So in the case of select() it seems like the memory we need 6 bits per file
descriptor, multiplied by the highest possible file descriptor (nfds) as passed
to the syscall. According to the man page of select:

        EINVAL nfds is negative or exceeds the RLIMIT_NOFILE resource limit (see
getrlimit(2)).

That second clause is relatively recent.

The code actually seems to silently cap the value instead of returning EINVAL
though? (IIUC):

        /* max_fds can increase, so grab it once to avoid race */
         rcu_read_lock();
         fdt = files_fdtable(current->files);
         max_fds = fdt->max_fds;
         rcu_read_unlock();
         if (n > max_fds)
                 n = max_fds;

The default for this cap seems to be 1024 where I checked (again, IIUC, it's
what ulimit -n returns?). I wasn't able to change it to more than 2048, which
makes the bitmaps still below PAGE_SIZE.

So if I get that right, the system admin would have to allow really large
RLIMIT_NOFILE to even make vmalloc() possible here. So I don't see it as a large
concern?

4k open files isn't that many.
Especially for programs that are using pipes to emulate windows events.

I suspect that fdt->max_fds is an upper bound for the highest fd the
process has open - not the RLIMIT_NOFILE value.
select() shouldn't be silently ignoring large values of 'n' unless
the fd_set bits are zero.

Of course, select does scale well for high numbered fds
and neither poll nor select scale well for large numbers of fds.

	David

�{.n�+���zwZ��,j���n�˛���m�b��f�)���w+h����&�K�rJ+�Z+��ފw�r��L2Ǟ��i��0�X�����?��zf���ky���[hv�������zf��K�rJ+��