From: Daniel Colascione <dancol@google.com>
To: dave.hansen@intel.com
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Tim Murray <timmurray@google.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Why do we let munmap fail?
Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 16:16:10 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKOZueu8ckN1b-cYOxPhL5f7Bdq+LLRP20NK3x7Vtw79oUT3pg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2e7fb27e-90b4-38d2-8ae1-d575d62c5332@intel.com>
On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 4:02 PM Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com> wrote:
> On 05/21/2018 03:54 PM, Daniel Colascione wrote:
> >> There are also certainly denial-of-service concerns if you allow
> >> arbitrary numbers of VMAs. The rbtree, for instance, is O(log(n)), but
> >> I 'd be willing to be there are plenty of things that fall over if you
> >> let the ~65k limit get 10x or 100x larger.
> > Sure. I'm receptive to the idea of having *some* VMA limit. I just think
> > it's unacceptable let deallocation routines fail.
> If you have a resource limit and deallocation consumes resources, you
> *eventually* have to fail a deallocation. Right?
That's why robust software sets aside at allocation time whatever resources
are needed to make forward progress at deallocation time. That's what I'm
trying to propose here, essentially: if we specify the VMA limit in terms
of pages and not the number of VMAs, we've effectively "budgeted" for the
worst case of VMA splitting, since in the worst case, you end up with one
page per VMA.
Done this way, we still prevent runaway VMA tree growth, but we can also
make sure that anyone who's successfully called mmap can successfully call
munmap.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-21 23:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-21 22:07 Why do we let munmap fail? Daniel Colascione
2018-05-21 22:12 ` Dave Hansen
2018-05-21 22:20 ` Daniel Colascione
2018-05-21 22:29 ` Dave Hansen
2018-05-21 22:35 ` Daniel Colascione
2018-05-21 22:48 ` Dave Hansen
2018-05-21 22:54 ` Daniel Colascione
2018-05-21 23:02 ` Dave Hansen
2018-05-21 23:16 ` Daniel Colascione [this message]
2018-05-21 23:32 ` Dave Hansen
2018-05-22 0:00 ` Daniel Colascione
2018-05-22 0:22 ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-05-22 0:38 ` Daniel Colascione
2018-05-22 1:19 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2018-05-22 1:41 ` Daniel Colascione
2018-05-22 2:09 ` Daniel Colascione
2018-05-22 2:11 ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-05-22 1:22 ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-05-22 5:34 ` Nicholas Piggin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAKOZueu8ckN1b-cYOxPhL5f7Bdq+LLRP20NK3x7Vtw79oUT3pg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=dancol@google.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=timmurray@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).